ARE WE STILL GRAPPLING WITH THE MEANING OF SPECIFIC GOODS AFTER 98 YEARS OF RE WAIT

Abstract

The classification of goods as specific or unascertained is crucial for determining when ownership and risk transfer from the seller to the buyer under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 of the United Kingdom. While the distinction holds significant legal consequences, the current legal framework remains ambiguous, particularly with Section 61 of the Act, which does not clearly define the degree of identification required for goods to qualify as specific. This paper examines the deficiencies in Section 61 of the Sale of Goods Act of the United Kingdom, using case law such as Ward v Bignall and Re Wait to explore how the law struggles to address complex identification scenarios, particularly in bulk or international transactions. The paper argues for a redefinition of "specific goods," proposing that goods be considered specific when they are physically identified, identified with a serial number, or sufficiently identified such that a buyer could recognize them if transferred to another party. The paper concludes by calling for legislative reform to provide clarity, reduce legal uncertainty, and mitigate the risks and disputes arising from this issue in commercial contracts.