Student Solution

-->

"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world”
– Nelson Mandela

1 University

1 Course

1 Subject

Ch. 15 Discussion

Ch. 15 Discussion

Q It's very important to note that: "....a thief never passes 'good title'"..... a title you can base 'ownership' on. In some cases, such as with tangible personal property items such as cars, boats, 'Sea-doo's', even cattle; titles are used. Other tangible property there are no titles. Consequently, it can be very difficult to prove ownership. In Example 1: I delivered my lawn mower to Dave's Mower Repair. Dave was supposed to repair my mower. Instead, my good friend, Dave, sold the mower in the ordinary course of his business to Ralph. Ralph paid for the mower and was unaware it was my mower. In Example 2: I delivered my car to my local car wash, "Suds". "Suds" is not a merchant in buying and selling cars, merely washes them. Suds sold my car to Mort, who paid a fair price, $8000, and was unaware that I owned it, or aware that the sale was improper. Always remember, '.....a thief, a fraud, never passes a good title'. Just point out where title passes, WHY, and the implications. As in, can owner retrieve their goods in a replevin action(return of property.)

View Related Questions

Solution Preview

I think that in case of Example 1, the title does not pass to Dave. In other words, Dave does not pass a good title. This is because Dave knows that lawn mowers are delivered to him for the purpose of repairing and not for the purpose of selling. Therefore, Dave should have asked the owner of the lawn mower whether he or she wanted to have his or her lawn mower repaired by Dave or not. However, Dave did not ask the owner of the lawn mower about the purpose of the lawn mower being delivered to Dave’s Mower Repair. Therefore, in this case, Dave is at fault. If Dave had any doubts in his mind, he should have ensured to call the lawn mower’s owner and confirm about the purpose for which the lawn mower had been delivered by the owner to Dave. I think that this is a clear case of fraud because Dave had not informed the owner of the lawn mower before selling the lawn mower which belonged to the owner and not to Dave.