All
| TITLE | Supreme Court Decision 2013Da13832 Decided June 10, 2016【Perfect Tender, etc.】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
|
[1] In the instant case where: (a) an imported luxury sedan sold by Company A to Company B was involved in an accident involving engine failure, etc. while waiting at a traffic signal; (b) Company A collected the vehicle, performed repair work, and gave notice of the completion of repair 11 months after the date of the accident; (c) Company B claimed against Company A for damage compensation for the loss of usage due to the delayed repair; and (d) a clause in the vehicle’s quality warranty stated to the effect that “in the event that repair work is performed on any vehicle defect, Company A shall not reimburse for any indirect expenses other than the price of parts and components in question and service charge, namely, rental car expense or loss arising from the inability to use the vehicle,” the case holding that Company A is not exempt from default liability for delayed repair, the warranty clause notwithstanding [2] In the instant case where: (a) an imported luxury sedan sold by Company A to Company B was involved in an accident involving engine failure, etc. while waiting at a traffic signal; (b) Company A collected the vehicle, performed repair work, and gave notice of the completion of repair 11 months after the date of the accident; and (c) Company B claimed against Company A for damage compensation for the diminution in value due to the delayed repair, the case holding that: (a) if the value has actually diminished due to the lapse of prolonged time exceeding the ordinary period necessary for repair, this constitutes damage from the delayed repair distinct from the diminution in value due to psychological suspicion following a repair or for irreparable parts; and (b) the court should determine the amount of damages having reasonable causal link to the delayed repair, taking into account all the indirect facts revealed by the outcome of evidentiary investigation and the entire tenor of oral proceedings [3] In the instant case where: (a) an imported luxury sedan sold by Company A to Company B was involved in an accident involving engine failure while waiting at a traffic signal; (b) Company A collected the vehicle, performed repair work, and gave notice of the completion of repair 11 months after the date of the accident; and (c) Company B claimed against Company A for damage arising from the delayed repair, alleging a diminution in value arising from deteriorated performance due to the vehicle having been left without being driven for a prolonged period, the case holding that: (a) the value can be deemed to have diminished by the damaged power system having been left without being used for an extended period of time; and (b) such diminution in value exceeds the scope of depreciation from normal use, and thus may be included in the damage arising from the delayed repair |
|
