Law of Tort
Tutorial weeks 6-7
Question One
Presented by:
Joseph (50342303)
Sing(50295647)
Question One





Facts
Issues
Rules
Applications
Conclusion
Facts

B&C Co. Ltd ---- Car -- A (hire-purchase)

A --- $6000 monthly-- B&C Co. Ltd. (2 years)

A uses illegal method to make him become
registered car owner

A -----car----D, an auctioneer

D-----car--X (public auction)
Issues



Can B&C Co. Ltd. sue A, if so, what is the
remedies available?
Can B&C Co. Ltd. sue D, if so, what is the
remedies available?
Does X get the title of the car?
Rules




Trespass to Chattels
Conversion
Sale of Goods Ordinance s24
Principle of Jus Tertii
Trespass to Chattels



unlawful interference with the possession
of a chattel by P.
direct and intentional act
P have possession or a right to possession
Conversion




intentional act
Someone’s act which is the owner can do only,
and seriously inconsistent the possession of
goods
D knows the goods do not belong to P or
intention not to challenge P’s right is not
relevant.
Note that: The difference between trespass to
chattels and conversion is:
Trespass: not serious interference (liable)
Conversion: ONLY Serious interference (liable)
Principle of Jus Tertii
Definition: D claims that he has a
better title or is acting for 3rd party
who has a better title.
 P has possession of the chattel and D
does not have a better title, D cannot
plead jus tertii.
 When P was not in possession of the
chattel but relied on his right to
possession, D can plead jus tertii.

Cases



Penfolds Wine v Elliott (1947) 74 CLR 204
(supra)
R.H. Willis and Son v British Car Auctions
Ltd (1978)
Leake v Loveday (1842) 4 Man & F 972
Penfolds Wine v Elliott (1947)

P sold wines bottle with words “This bottle is the property of
Penfolds Wine Ltd”

The bottles could not be used for storing any other product

D brought two empty bottles for own wine and sold



Held: D had committed conversion.
D used bottles for his own trade
D Violated the P’s title to use the bottle
Applications: A’s Remedies
-
Trespass to chattel: intentionally and directly interference on the
possession of the car

Conversion:
A changed the ownership registration, gave the car to the D for
disposal, A committed an act of conversion

A breached the HP contract

HP contract was void and B&C Co. had the right to immediate
possession

In the law of conversion, A gave the Car to D without the consent
of B&C Co, will liable in conversion

A was liable the unpaid purchase price to BC Ltd.
-
R.H. Willis and Son v British
Car Auctions Ltd (1978)

P, a motor car dealers, sold a car on hire-purchase terms to C (Mr.
Croucher)

In default of the agreement, C entered the car in car auction run by
D (auctioneers)

In the auction, the car was sold to the highest bidder

On knowing that the car had been sold, P bought an action against
the auctioneers for conversion

Held: the auctioneers were liable in conversion to the true owner
since they had sold a chattel to which they did not have any good
title
Applications: D’s remedies
Conversion:
 When A hands over the car D for sale in the
public auction. In law, the receipt by D of B&C
Co.’s chattel amounts to conversion if D’s act is
inconsistent with B&C Co.’s title to the good.

On this basis, D receiving goods for sale to X
may render him liable in conversion even if he
innocently effects the sales because his act is
inconsistent with B&C Co.’s title.
Sale of Goods Ordinance s24

Where goods are openly sold in a shop or
market in Hong Kong, in the ordinary
course of the business of such shop or
market, the buyer acquires a good title to
the goods, provided he buys them in good
faith and without notice of any defect or
want of title on the part of the seller.
Leake v Loveday (1842)

It was held that where P was not in
possession at the time of the conversion
but relied on his right to possession, jus
tertii could be pleaded by the defendant.
Applications: X’s Title


If B&C Co. will take legal action against X
for conversion. X can plead jus tertii as
defence
As a buyer in market overt, X may also
claim that he has bought the car in good
faith and without knowledge of the defeat
in the seller’s title
Conclusion
B&C Co. may sue A for Trespass to chattels
 The remedies: Damage
B&C Co. may sue both A and D for conversion
 The remedies: Damages
-Both A and D are liable to pay the outstanding balance due from
B&C Co. ($6000*18=$108000)
X’s title to the car
 He may get the title as he may plead that he buys the car in the
market overt, for bona fide value and without knowledge of defeat
in title