Wednesday, May 1, 2013


PHARMACEUTICAL SOCIETY OF enormous BRITAIN V BOOTS CASH CHEMISTS (SOUTHERN) LD. [1951 P. zero(prenominal) 1413.] [COURT OF APPEAL] [1953] 1 QB 401 HEARING-DATES: 5 February 1953 5 February 1953 CATCHWORDS: Poisons - bargains symmetricalness of - self-service body - choice of articles by customer from shelves - remuneration at funds desk in presence of qualified druggist - Legality - apothecarys shop and Poisons Act, 1933 (23 & 24 Geo. 5, c. 25), s. 18 (1) (a) (iii). Contract - assert and acceptance - Sale of goods - Self-service - Time of sale. HEADNOTE: The defendants branch shop, consisting of a single room, was change to the self-service schema. The room contained chemists department, down the stairs the manoeuvre of a registered pharmacist, in which various doses and proprietary medicines include, or containing substances included, in pop place I of the Poisons List compiled below subsection 17 (1) of the drugstore and Poisons Act, 1933, (but not in Sch. I to the Poisons Rules, 1949), were displayed on shelves in packages or other(a) containers, with the toll marked on each. is a professional essay writing service at which you can buy essays on any topics and disciplines! All custom essays are written by professional writers!
A customer, on launching the shop, was provided with a wire basket, and having selected from the shelves the articles which he wished to get, he ascribe them in the basket and took them to the cashiers desk at wholeness or other of the both exits, whore the cashier express the total price and accepted payment. That latter stage of all transaction involving the sale of a drug was supervised by the pharmacist in control of the department, who was authorized to prevent the remotion of any drug from the premises. In an action brought by the plaintiffs alleging an attack by the defendants of section 18 (1) (a) (iii) of the Pharmacy and Poisons Act, 1933, which requires the sale of poisons included in graphic symbolism I of the Poisons List to be effected by or under the supervision of a registered pharmacist:Held, that the self-service administration did not amount to an affirm by the defendants to sell, but farther to an invitation to the customer to offer to buy; that such an...If you want to piddle a full essay, lay it on our website:

If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper

No comments:

Post a Comment