Fowler v Hollins: 1872

The plaintiff claimed in conversion of bales of cotton bought in good faith through a broker in Liverpool.
Held: The purchasers were strictly liable.
Cleasby J said: ‘the liability under it is founded upon what has been regarded as a salutary rule for the protection of property, namely, that persons deal with the property in chattels or exercise acts of ownership over them at their peril.’


Cleasby J


(1872) LR 7 QB 616

Cited by:

Appeal fromHollins v Fowler HL 1875
One who deals with goods at the request of the person who has the actual custody of them, in the bona fide belief that the custodier is the true owner, or has the authority of the true owner, should be excused for what he does if the act is of such . .
CitedDouglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others; similar HL 2-May-2007
In Douglas, the claimants said that the defendants had interfered with their contract to provide exclusive photographs of their wedding to a competing magazine, by arranging for a third party to infiltrate and take and sell unauthorised photographs. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.251749