On 1 November 2019, Billy, who worked as a banker, returned from Japan for business trip with his luggage in the Hong Kong Airport. There was a long queue for taxi, so he decided to take the airport shuttle bus to meet an important client, Success Ltd., concerning a loan arrangement for the merger and acquisition. Because Billy was in a hurry, he left his luggage in the shuttle bus. The luggage contained his proposal and some business documents related to Success Ltd. which were important and confidential. Billy was extremely nervous to get his luggage back and put an advertisement in a local newspapers. The advertisement mentioned that he was willing to pay a reward of HK$20,000 to any person who returned the luggage to him. To show his sincerity, Billy also deposited HK$5,000 as deposit in the bank account.

This has also been referred in the newspapers advertisement. David, the shuttle bus driver, found Billys luggage in the shuttle bus, went to the address printed on the tag of the luggage, and returned the luggage to Billy, without reading the advertisement. Billy was very delighted that his luggage was returned and gave David HK1,000 as a reward for his help. David subsequently read the newspapers advertisement and now wants to claim the HK$20,000 reward. Billy refused to pay and said that David was not entitled to the reward. In fact, Billy would like to claim back the HK$1,000 reward that he paid earlier to David. Billy then went to a skiing holiday. Before leaving he orders a grey carpet for his new home from Quality Carpet Ltds (QCL) sample book and has paid HK$20,000 to QCL. The back of the sample has a sticker on it which describes the carpet as 100 percent wool. Billy also bought an expensive set of new skis from Alpine Ltd. (AL) for HK$25,000. The first time Billy uses the skis they snap into pieces. On his return from holiday, Billy discovers the colour of the carpet is pink and 100 percent polypropylene. Early this month, Billy booked his car into Tans garage for a service. When he collected the car Tan told Billy that the work was complete, but in fact, Tan had forgotten to fully tighten the handbrake cable. Billy lived on a hill and when he got home he applied the handbrake and got out. The handbrake failed to hold the car which rolled down the hill and crushed Jill, who was loading shopping into the back of her car. As a result of the collision, Billys car was damaged and Jill was injured.

Advise Billy as to her rights and remedies against QCL and AL under sale of goods law. (7 marks)