The plaintiff sold radar equipment to the defendant, who exported it to a customer in Iran. The contract was contained in the plaintiff’s order confirmation, which stated that orders were subject to its conditions of sale, a copy of which was available on request. Condition 7 excluded all warranties and conditions, including those implied by the Sale of Goods Act 1979, save for a warranty that the goods were free of defects caused by faulty materials or bad workmanship. To invoke that warranty, the buyer had to give prompt notice of any defect and to return the defective part at its own expense to the plaintiff for repair. The plaintiff’s only liability was then to repair the defect or give credit for goods returned. The defendant, who did not request a copy, never saw the condition, which was not specifically drawn to its attention by the plaintiff.

On delivery in Iran the goods were found to be defective and were returned for repair. The dispute was whether the defendant was liable for the cost of returning the goods to the plaintiff which it had deducted from the plaintiff’s bill. This depended on two questions. Was the relevant condition incorporated into the contract? If so, was the condition reasonable under UCTA?

The majority, Hirst and Waite, L.JJ., held that the condition was not incorporated. The statement on the order confirmation was sufficient to incorporate the plaintiff’s terms, but only to the extent that they were in common form or usual in the relevant business. However, following Interfoto and Circle Freight International Ltd v. Medeast Gulf Exports Ltd,3 other considerations applied to particularly onerous or unusual conditions, which condition 7 was held to be. Such a condition had to be specifically drawn to the