Sally wanted to replace the old carpet in her home. She entered into a contract with Good Carpet Co. for the purchase and installation of a new carpet. The price of the carpet was $3,000 and the cost of the labor to install the carpet was $150. Later Sally became dissatisfied with this transaction and wants to sue Good Carpet Co. Sally wants to apply the contract rules of the UCC, but Good Carpet Co. wants to apply the contract rules of the common law. Which source of law should govern this case?

A. The contract rules of the UCC apply, because the contract included the sale of goods.

B. The contract rules of the UCC apply, because the predominant purpose of the contract was sale of goods.

C. The contract rules of the common law apply, because the contract included services, which are governed by the common law.

D. The contract rules of the common law apply, because all contracts are governed by the common law.

Question

Harris

Business

20 March, 16:10

Sally wanted to replace the old carpet in her home. She entered into a contract with Good Carpet Co. for the purchase and installation of a new carpet. The price of the carpet was $3,000 and the cost of the labor to install the carpet was $150. Later Sally became dissatisfied with this transaction and wants to sue Good Carpet Co. Sally wants to apply the contract rules of the UCC, but Good Carpet Co. wants to apply the contract rules of the common law. Which source of law should govern this case?

A. The contract rules of the UCC apply, because the contract included the sale of goods.

B. The contract rules of the UCC apply, because the predominant purpose of the contract was sale of goods.

C. The contract rules of the common law apply, because the contract included services, which are governed by the common law.

D. The contract rules of the common law apply, because all contracts are governed by the common law.

+4

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Paul Mcpherson · Answer 1

B) The contract rules of the UCC apply, because the predominant purpose of the contract was sale of goods.

Explanation:

The contract doesn't include in its mayor part provision of services. And Sally wanted to sue Good Carpet for the services that they provided, not for the good it sells.