Parsons was to advance money to Townsend. As security he was to have the right to take immediate possession of the goods and sell them.
Held: As a licence to take possession of goods as between two private individuals, it fell within sections 3 and 4 of the 1878 Act. As whether it was a bill of sale within the 1882 Act Lord Esher MR said: ‘Section 3 says that the two Acts are to be construed as one, and that the expression ‘bill of sale’ is to have the same meaning in the Act of 1882 as in the Act of 1878, except as to bills of sale given otherwise and by way of security for the payment of money, to which the Act is not to apply. This document, therefore, is a bill of sale within the Act of 1882 because it is a bill of sale within the Act of 1878.’ It was not made in the form required and it was, therefore, void.
Judges:
Lord Esher MR
Citations:
(1886) 16 QBD 532
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Online Catering Ltd v Acton and Another CA 10-Feb-2010
The claimant agreed for the defendant to repair its fleet of vehicles. The defendant, having fees outstanding, entered the claimants’ premises and removed vehicles saying falsely that they were to be repaired, and then refused to return them. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract
Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.414896
