Summary judgment will be granted if there is no genuine issue of material fact.
The consumer brought warranty claims against the manufacturer in connection with the purchase of a yacht. The manufacturer moved for summary judgment in the case, claiming that the consumer never presented the boat to an authorized dealer for warranty work and thus failed to perform a condition precedent to the warranty obligations.
Should summary judgment be granted in favour of the manufacturer?
The court denied the manufacturer's motion for summary judgment, holding that a fact-finder could reasonably conclude that the manufacturer waived reliance on the condition precedent. The court found that the manufacturer provided the consumer with replacement parts at no charge and promised to reimburse the consumer for work performed by people other than authorized dealers. The court also rejected the manufacturer's argument that the consumer's suit was premature. The court found that under the Pennsylvania UCC, when a party, such as the manufacturer, repudiated concerning a performance not yet due, which repudiation would substantially impair the value of the contract, the aggrieved party, such as the consumer, could resort to any remedy for breach. Finally the court found that the issue of whether the consumer refused to allow warranty work constituted a genuine issue of material fact.