The Sale Of Goods Act

1976 WordsApr 17, 20168 Pages
The first issue is wether or not Aline has rights to sell the car to Christine after having sold it to Benjamin. “The basic rule is expressed in the Latin maxim nemo dat quod non habet”. This means that a seller cannot pass to a buyer a better title to goods than he possesses, “unless the owner of the goods is by his conduct precluded from denying the seller 's authority to sell”. In Greenwood, the court held that the car belonged to Bennett as Searle did not have title and could therefore not transfer that title to Harper. On applying this to the facts, it is possible to conclude that Aline can pass no better title than she has to Christine after having sold the car to Benjamin. The Nemo Dat principle aims at protecting innocent third parties and owners of property who are about to suffer a wrong. However, some exceptions to the principle exist. Therefore, the issue of who has better rights to the car; Benjamin or Aline arises. The Sale of Goods Act (sga) provides; “Where a person having sold goods continues or is in possession of the goods, (seller in possession) or the documents of title to the goods, the delivery or transfer by that person, or by a mercantile agent acting for him, of the goods or documents of title under any sale, pledge, or other disposition thereof, to another receiving the same in good faith and without notice of the previous sale, has the same effect as if the person making the delivery or transfer were expressly authorized by the owner of the
Open Document