Need answer

Question 1 Ziyad is an entrepreneur engaged in various trades. He supplies furniture to offices, acts as a broker between timber suppliers and carpenters and runs his own carpentry in town. Ziyad is contracted by Damien, to supply him 300 chairs, 550 tables and 10 office sofas. To supply these furniture, Ziyad contracted a local carpenter, Basheer to produce them. Under the entered contract, Damien is required to pay the first installment of payment once he receives the first delivery. Upon receiving the second delivery, the remainder of the payment will be paid. Basheer never received such a big order before. Since Ziyad was a well known entrepreneur, Basheer agreed to undertake the assignment, even though he did not have the capacity to do it on his own. Basheer contracted Samuel to produce 50% of the furniture. They will be producing goods for each delivery (delivery from Ziyad to Damien). Samuel agreed, but on condition that the furniture he make, will not be sold to a furniture selling company, other than Ziyad and his customer Damien. This was communicated to Ziyad, who agreed assuming that Damien would only be using it for his office. Upon delivering the first delivery, Ziyad came to know that Damien is a fraudster who was contracting parties under a false profile. Ziyad already had rejected multiple supply orders from other buyers in order to complete this assignment and has incurred many additional costs. He has the possession of the goods and he is not paid by Damien. Upon realization of the magnitude of his loss, Ziyad quickly found another buyer, Claire, for the first delivery, who also happened to be a supplier of furniture operating in another state. On the other hand, when the first delivery was made by Ziyad, Basheer and Samuel were on the verge of finishing the goods for the final delivery. They were informed by Ziyad that since Damien was a fraudster, Ziyad no longer requires the rest of the furniture, and will not pay for the second and third delivery. Assessment 3 - Term 1, 2020 Page 2 Considering the above case; a) Advise Ziyad, Basheer and Samuel on the actions that they may take and the remedies they may seek under the Sale of Goods Act 1979. (30 Marks) b) Discuss how the judgment of Farquharson Bros v. J King & Co Lid (1902) may benefit Claire, in the event where either Basheer or Samuel may want the furniture back. (20 Marks)