This basic postulate of Caveat Emptor, “let the buyer beware,” is the core principle in the realm of contract law. According to this, a buyer checks the quality and suitability of goods before he buys them solely at his discretion. Principle goes ahead to discourage a buyer from putting his absolute reliance on a seller; the burden of investigating himself is pushed on his side. This principle has changed substantially and significantly with legislative interventions like consumer protection laws to strike a balance in the relationship between a buyer and seller.
Caveat emptor stipulates that under the doctrine of caveat emptor, there is an assumption that the buyer can inspect the goods for himself or herself and make an informed decision. By failing to inspect the product sufficiently, the buyer accepts all the defects unless certain exceptions apply. This is the doctrine that applies especially in commercial transactions. It is an integral part of the sale agreements in most countries around the world.
This doctrine plays a significant role in markets to foster transparency as well as fairness. However, the principle has its limitations too. Amid increasing consumer rights movements, this erstwhile rigid doctrine of caveat emptor has shifted toward more buyer-centric regulations. Key features of the said doctrine are:
The doctrine of caveat emptor, or “let the buyer beware,” has evolved around the buyer’s responsibility to check products prior to purchasing, there are significant exceptions in which the seller is liable. Sellers are responsible when they indulge in misrepresentation or fraud by withholding vital information about the quality or condition of the product. For example, suppose the buyer is relying on the seller’s expertise or special advice. The seller will be bound to make sure the product meets the intended purpose-the principle of fitness for a particular purpose. Even though caveat emptor puts the onus on the buyer, there are some exceptions whereby the seller is liable
The Sale of Goods Act, 1930 regulates the transactions between buyers and sellers in India. Though this law is relevant for the doctrine of caveat emptor, several protective clauses have tampered with it for the benefit of buyers:
Aspect | Relevance under the Sale of Goods Act |
Buyer’s Responsibility | To inspect the goods carefully |
Seller’s Liability | Arises in case of latent defects or misrepresentation |
It is with some landmark cases that the development and practically applicable forms of the caveat emptor doctrine could be shown. And indeed, these trace how the courts interpreted and, at times, restricted the principle in order to achieve fair play in transactions. A few landmark examples are:
Therefore, the Doctrine of caveat emptor is one of the oldest and most fundamental doctrines in commerce and contract law that remains relatively unaltered. Its strict application has softened and changed through legislation under the Sale of Goods Act and consumer protection laws. Onus on the buyer to exercise caution is still there, but indeed some responsibility lies on the seller’s side as well for a fair deal to transpire.
Caveat emptor is Latin for “let the buyer beware,” meaning a buyer has to be cautious regarding the goods he buys.
Main exceptions include misrepresentation, latent defects, and goods sold by description or sample.
The Act establishes the principle that, though the buyer is under a duty to inspect the goods, he makes the seller liable in certain situations, such as hidden defects and unfit goods.
Yes, if the defects are not discoverable through reasonable inspection, the seller is responsible.
Commercial transactions apply most, but now consumer protection acts provide greater protection to the buyer.
In finance and investments, equity and stock are terms often used interchangeably. But they carry…
The difference between capital gains and investment income lies in how they are earned, their…
A company's current ratio and liquid ratio are indispensable measures of its short-term liquidity. These…
The difference between capital expenditure and operating expenditure lies in their nature, purpose, and financial…
Entrepreneurship is a rewarding, as well as challenging, journey. Entrepreneurship encompasses both navigating the "challenges…
The difference between bank overdraft and bank loan lies in their structure, purpose, and repayment…
This website uses cookies.