Commercial Law: Sale of Goods - University of Wolverhampton

Study Unit 5 Suggested minimum study hours: 15TopicTitle to Goods and Transfer of TitleThis Unit covers material contained in the Learning Project.IntroductionThe ultimate purpose of a contract for the sale of goods is to pass ownership of goods from theseller to the buyer. The general rule is that only a person with title can pass good title to anotherperson. There are, however, exceptions to this rule. In this Unit we look at these exceptions andat the rights of the buyer in the event of failure by the seller to transfer title.Objectivesa To discuss the policy behind the ‘nemo dat’ rule.b To examine the exceptions to the rule.c To consider the liability of a transferor lacking in title.Essential ReadingThese titles have been supplied as part of your study materials.Commercial Law Textbook – Relevant Chapter(s)Commercial Law 150 Leading Cases – (See listed cases)General ReadingThese titles have not been supplied and are not essential reading, butyou may wish to refer to them to further your understanding.The Sale of Goods, Atiyah – Relevant Chapter(s)Commercial Law, Bradgate – Relevant Chapter(s)Case law and statutesNEMO DAT QUOD NON HABETi The basic ruleSGA 1979: s21(1) ‘Subject to ... than the seller had.’ii EstoppelCentral Newbury Car Auctions Ltd v Unity Finance Ltd [1957] 1 QB 371Eastern Distributors Ltd v Goldring [1957] 2 QB 600* Farquharson Bros v King & Co Ltd [1902] AC 325Henderson & Co v Williams [1895] 1 QB 521Mercantile Credit Co Ltd v Hamblin [1965] 2 QB 242Moorgate Mercantile Co Ltd v Twitchings [1977] AC 890Shaw v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1987] 1 WLR 1332SGA 1979: s21(1)iii Mercantile agency* Astley Industrial Trust Ltd v Miller [1968] 2 All ER 36Oppenheimer v Attenborough & Son [1908] 1 KB 221Pearson v Rose & Young Ltd [1951] 1 KB 275Stadium Finance Ltd v Robbins [1962] 2 QB 664SGA 1979: s21(2)