HI · jury_instructions

Haw. Civil Jury Instr. 12.1

BREACH OF EXPRESS WARRANTY – ELEMENTS

activein force · 2026-08-20 – presentas-observed

To prevail on the claim for breach of an express warranty

against defendant(s), plaintiff(s) must prove all of the

following elements:

1. Defendant(s) was/were seller(s)/lessor(s) in a sale/

lease of goods; and

2. Plaintiff(s) was/were reasonably expected to use,

consume or be affected by the goods; and

3. A representation, affirmation of fact, or promise

regarding the goods was made to buyer(s)/lessee(s) by

defendant(s) or an authorized agent of defendant(s); and

4.1 That representation, affirmation of fact, or promise

became part of the basis of the bargain between

seller(s)/lessor(s) and buyer(s)/lessee(s); and

5. The goods as delivered did not conform to that

representation, affirmation of fact, or promise; and

6. The non-conformance of the goods with the

representation, affirmation of fact, or promise was a legal

cause of injury to plaintiff(s).

1 It is not clear under Hawaiʻi law whether this element applies

in cases of personal injury to third-party beneficiaries of warranties

under Haw. Rev. Stat. § 490:2-318.

Provenance

Source: courts.state.hi.us
Retrieved: 2026-08-20
Edition: 2026-08-20
Content hash: a24a613554b9ef72847779f614b2eac057532598d4cf649ba0761155cfe34250

View the official source →

The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.

Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.

Coverage · API docs