Sale and supply of goods and services

This subtopic provides an overview of the law and practice relating to the sale and supply of goods and services in Ireland.

•
Practice Note: Ireland—Sale of goods provides an overview of the law and practice relating to contracts for the sale and supply of goods. It reviews the key legislative provisions of the Sale of Goods Act 1893 (Ireland), Sale of Goods and Supply of Services Acts 1980 (Ireland) and the Consumer Rights Act 2022 (Ireland) and their application to the sale and/or supply of goods in business to business (B2B) and business to consumer (B2C) contracts
•
Practice Note: Ireland—Supply of services provides an overview of the legislation and regulation impacting business to business (B2B) and business to consumer (B2C) contracts for the supply of services. It analyses the key legislation and regulations applicable and will highlight principal statutory rights and requirements. This Practice Note considers the use of standard terms and conditions versus bespoke agreements for use in documenting supply of services transactions. Sector-specific legislation and regulation is not considered
•
Practice Note: Transfer pricing—Ireland—Q&A guide contains a jurisdiction-specific Q&A guide to

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Ireland - Commercial News

Elis’s acquisition of rival laundry services provider gets in-depth probe in Ireland

MLex: Elis plans to buy rival O.C.L. Laundry Services are now being probed in full, the Irish competition authority said this week. Both companies are active in the outsourced supply of flat linen rental and maintenance services, such as collection, sorting, washing and drying of such linen for customers such as hotels, hospitals and nursing homes. The authority will now assess if the deal results in a substantial lessening of competition.

EU countries question proposed approach for delaying AI Act’s key duties

MLex: A planned delay for key EU AI Act duties has come under question from Member States, which warn that the European Commission’s proposed approach lacks clear criteria, predictability and sufficient involvement of national authorities. Even supporters of a pause raised concerns, while others asked what happens if the relevant compliance tools aren’t ready even with the new timeline or if the amendments don’t pass before the August 2026 deadline.

Digital omnibus on AI regulation–Considerations for Life Sciences companies

Life sciences analysis: The European Commission published its Digital Omnibus on AI Regulation Proposal, a legislative proposal introducing targeted measures intended to facilitate the practical implementation of the EU Artificial Intelligence Act (‘AI Act’). Hélène Boland and Fabien Roy of Hogan Lovells summarise key considerations for life sciences companies in this article.

General Court dismisses Amazon’s Challenge to VLOP designation (Amazon EU v Commission)

EU Law analysis: In its judgment of 19 November 2025 in Case T-367/23, the General Court of the European Union dismissed the action brought by Amazon EU Sàrl (Amazon) against its classification by the European Commission (Commission) as a so-called ‘Very Large Online Platform’ (VLOP) under Article 33(1) of Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 (EU Digital Services Act or EU DSA). Notably, Amazon does not call into question the correctness of the figure of 45 million monthly active users within the EU to qualify as a VLOP. The meeting of this threshold is out of dispute. Rather, Amazon takes the position that Article 33(1) DSA is unlawful in so far as that provision makes certain marketplaces subject to the obligations laid down in Articles 34 to 43 DSA. In particular, Amazon puts forward an infringement of the freedom to conduct its business, its right to property, the principle of equal treatment, the freedom of expression and of information and the protection of confidential information. All these rights are enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter). The General Court considered all these rights on an individual basis, confirmed for most of them an interference, but at the same time emphasized that none of these rights is of absolute character. The court therefore engaged in analysing whether the specific interference could be justified. Ultimately, the judges reached the conclusion that in the case of Amazon the obligations imposed by the EU DSA are within proportion and therefore justifiable. Written by Dr Nils Rauer MJI, partner, Global Co-Lead Artificial Intelligence & head of German Intellectual Property at Pinsent Masons.

View Ireland - Commercial by content type :

News