Should be a none issue sounds like.
Who is going to wait >12 months to file a claim upon receiving a defective product.
Anyone who doesn't know that the product is defective because the defect hasn't caused a problem yet. Let's say you get a MacBook Pro where the defect is that the screen hinges are much weaker than they should be, so the screen falls off after a year. The defect might be completely invisible to you up to that point.
Isn't the "defects present when customer takes delivery" bit quite vague?
Let's say I buy a Macbook Pro, which works fine for 13 months, then suddenly stops holding any charge whatsoever. One person could argue this defect is new, it wasn't present on delivery. Another could say the flaw (loose circuitry? Flaws in the battery material? A subtle bug in the power controller?) was present at delivery, it just didn't manifest itself immediately.
Which interpretation is correct? Or perhaps more accurately, which interpretation would hold up if it a lawsuit resulted?
Simple logic: If you buy a MacBook Pro, it will stop working at some point for one of three reasons: Because of a defect that was present when you took delivery, or because a defect that you or someone else caused after taking delivery, or because of wear and tear. If nobody handled the MacBook Pro wrong after delivery, then it is wear and tear or a defect that was present when you took delivery. EU laws also say that wear and tear mustn't stop it from working too early (but that would depend on how much wear and tear you produce; I suppose it is possible to wear out a perfectly good MBP battery within 13 months if you try very hard).
Proving: Normally, in a civil lawsuit a judge would have to decide which side is more likely. However, for selling goods the rules are changed: Within six months, it is assumed that the defect was present unless the seller shows a good reason why it is otherwise. After six months, it is assumed that you broke it unless you show a good reason why it is otherwise.
(1) You don't have to prove it within the first six months. Thus, if you want to read it like this, the EU directive guarantees a minimum of six months of warranty on any product sold inside the EU. Does not really change anything for most products and companies (because they over a longer warranty of their own) but it ensures that no company and no reseller is able to wriggle itself out of any warranty.
Except if the seller goes bankrupt, and any rights you might have against the seller become worthless. I haven't found anything that would give you rights against the manufacturer in that case. Of course the seller warranty protects you if the manufacturer goes out of business.
A question - does the UK sale of goods (and other countries) provide for a pro-rated refund based on use? For example, a 5 year old TV that would have an expected life of say 6 years would get 1/6th of the purchase price back?
Yes, but the examples given were more along the lines of "if it breaks within two months and it would be too difficult or expensive to repair", you could get back your money minus a small amount for two months use. In your example, it would be very arguable that the first year of use is worth a lot more than the sixth year. My 2006 MacBook was a state of the art computer when I bought it, but now it is really quite slow, with much too little RAM.