The third party who bought in good faith will be weaker than the claim of the original owner.

This means that the goods should be what a reasonable person would expect by considering price, description and other circumstances.

[1] Similar to the implied terms of description, the good must match the model, sample and installation unless the seller has pointed out the differences in advance.

[2] This classification may impact on the application of relevant legislation, for example in the United Kingdom, chapter 2 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 "applies to a contract for a trader to supply goods to a consumer" instead of the Sale of Goods Act 1979.

If the terms of ownership of risk are not defined by the parties, then the ‘default’ law of Sale of Goods applies.

[6] The Bangladeshi Sales of Goods Act was enacted in 1930 when Bangladesh was part of Bengal Province, British India.

The Indian Sale of Goods Act 1930 is a mercantile Law, which came into existence on 1 July 1930, during the British Raj.

[10][11] In the 1885 case of Inglis v Stock, a bulk consignment of sugar was shipped aboard the City of Dublin free on board (f.o.b.

The legal issue was whether the respondent had, at the time of the loss, an insurable interest in the 390 tons of sugar.

In the UK, the Sale of Goods (Amendment) Act 1995 amended the legal treatment of "unascertained goods forming part of an identified bulk",[13] reflecting recommendations and a draft bill proposed by the Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission in 1993.