WARRANTY. Ill 



person at the time of his selKng a horse say, " I never 

 warrant, but he is sound so far as / hnoiv," it is a qualified 

 warranty, and an action for breach of warranty may be 

 maintained upon it by the purchaser, if it can be proved 

 that the seller knew of the unsoundness (1). 



By the conditions of sale at repositories and public A limited 

 auctions, a specified short time is usually allowed, within warranty, 

 which the purchaser must give notice of any breach of 

 warranty. If he neglect to do this, he has no remedy, 

 unless such condition has been rendered inoperative by 

 fraud or artifice. And in a case where a warranty was to 

 last till the noon of the following day, when the sale was to 

 become complete, Mr. Justice Littledale said, " The war- 

 ranty here was as if the vendor had said, * after twenty-four 

 hours I do not warrant ; ' such a stipulation is not un- 

 reasonable " {m). 



In the case of Chapman v. Gwyther (n) the seller of a 

 horse signed the following warranty : — 



" June 5th, 1865. Mr. C. bought of Mr. G. G. a bay 

 horse for ninety pounds. Warranted sound. 



90^. G. G. 



" Warranted sound for one month. — G. G." 



The Court of Queen's Bench held that the latter words 

 limited the duration of the warranty, and meant that the 

 warranty was to continue in force for one month only ; and 

 that the complaint of unsoundness must therefore be made 

 by the purchaser within one month of the sale. 



Where a horse was sold by public auction at a repository 

 warranted to be a good worker, subject to the condition 

 that " horses warranted good workers, whether sold by 

 private treaty or public auction, not answering such war- 

 ranty must be returned before five o'clock of the day after 

 the sale, shall then be tried by a person to be appointed by 

 the auctioneer, and the decision of such person shall be 

 final ; " and the horse was not returned within the stipulated 

 time : it was held, on demurrer, in an action on the war- 

 ranty, that the buyer's only remedy was under the condi- 

 tion, and that he could not maintain the action (o). 



(T) Wood T. Smith, 4 C. & P. 45. 74. 



See also Finder v. Button, 7 L. T., (n) L. E., 1 Q. B. 463 ; 35 L. J., 



N. S. 269. Q. B. 142 ; 14 L. T., N. S. 477. 



(m) BywaUr v. Sichardson, 1 A. («) SinchcUffe y. Barwick, 5 Ex. 



& £. 508 ; S. C. S N. & M. 748 ; D. 177; 49 L. J., Ex. 495; 42 L. T., 



and see Best v. Osborne, 2 C. & P. N. 8. 492— C. A. 



