using the Sale of Goods Act of Jamaica. Todd, is quite excited, having just graduated with a first degree in Entrepreneurial Studies from the University of Technocrats. He has decided to start his own business. He will offer computer software consultancy services and has rented office space, in a newly open mall, which needs to be furnished. On April 1, he visited Furniture Galore Ltd. which is located in Westmoreland. On entering the store, he saw two impressive desks, which the sales representative told him were made of mahogany. Todd was impressed with the finished look and decided to buy both desks. The sales representative informed that he could only get one of the desks at the time of purchase, as the other has to remain on display. He was further informed that the other desk would be made at the factory which is located at the Montego Bay branch of Furniture Galore Limited. Todd agreed to the sale and paid the full price for both desks. He also arranged for the store to deliver both items and he was promised that the desks would be delivered in 7 days' time. Todd also purchased two chairs which were on the display floor but needed to be repainted. He was told that he would be called when these were repainted and ready for pick up. Unfortunately, on the night before the scheduled delivery of the desks, the Westmoreland Branch of the Furniture Galore Limited and all its contents were destroyed by fire. He never received a call about the chairs being repainted and ready for pick up.. The desk from the Montego Bay branch was delivered, as agreed, while Todd was out. On his return to the office, he discovered that the desk delivered was made from ply board instead of mahogany as he was told by the sales representative. Todd was upset and called the Manager of the store requesting that they take back the desk and asked for a refund of his money paid for the burnt desk and chairs. The Manager refused both requests, stating that ownership of the two desks and chairs passed to him when Todd paid for them. Todd also ordered stationery and supplies from Office Supplies and More Limited on April 20. He was informed when the invoice was faxed, that the items were ready and he could pick them up from a warehouse on King Street. Due to his hectic schedule, Todd did not collect the stationery and supplies until two weeks after the purchase was made. When he went to the warehouse to pick up, he discovered that half of the stationery and supplies were stolen. Office Supplies and More Limited is demanding full payment. Todd has refused to pay. On April 30, Todd woke up to find that his body was covered with a rash, which his doctor confirmed was a result of the paint he used to paint the office. Todd bought the paint from Paint and more Paint Limited, manufacturers of paint supplies, after he heard its advertisement about a new and improved paint product. Todd is contemplating taking legal action in respect of the foregoing the following and has sought your advice.

Advise Todd on his legal position in respect of each of the matters arising as follows with the use of the relevant legal principles and cases where relevant.

(a)What types of goods are the two chairs and the two desks purchased?

(b) Is Todd the owner of the desk and the two chairs at the time of the fire?

(c) Can Todd return the desk he received from the Montego Bay Branch?

(d) Should Todd pay for all the stationery including what was stolen?

(e) Can Todd successfully sue Paint and more paint Limited ?

2. Explain the principles, with the use of supporting cases, for the creation of an agency relationship by necessity.

3. Explain the offences under the Fair Competition Act of Misleading Advertising and Double Ticketing. Create two case scenarios, clearly depicting each offence being committed by an individual.