Examkin

Question

Difficulty: Very hardSale of Goods Act: Transfer of Title, Delivery, and Buyer/Seller Remedies

An electronics wholesaler delivers 50 television sets to a retailer under an agreement stating that ownership remains with the wholesaler until the full price is paid in three monthly installments. Before making the first payment, the retailer sells 10 sets in the ordinary course of business to retail customers who buy them in good faith without knowledge of the retention-of-title clause. The retailer subsequently defaults on payment and becomes insolvent. Which of the following best explains the legal position regarding title to the 10 sets and the remedies available under the Sale of Goods Act?

  1. The retail customers obtain valid title under the 'buyer in possession' exception to nemo dat, leaving the wholesaler with a personal remedy to sue the retailer for the contract price.Answer
  2. B
    The retail customers obtain valid title because under all installment credit schemes and hire purchase contracts, ownership passes automatically to the purchaser upon physical delivery.
  3. C
    The wholesaler can repossess the 10 sets from the retail customers because the retailer committed a breach of warranty, which automatically repudiates all secondary transactions.
  4. D
    The retail customers acquire no title because displaying goods in a retail store constitutes a binding legal offer that prevents third parties from acquiring rights when the retailer lacks actual title.

Answer

The retail customers acquire valid title under the buyer in possession exception to the nemo dat rule, leaving the wholesaler with a personal remedy against the retailer for the contract price.
Under Section 25 of the Sale of Goods Act, when a buyer who has bought or agreed to buy goods obtains possession of them with the seller's consent, delivering those goods under a sale to an innocent third party acting in good faith confers valid legal title on that third party. Consequently, the original seller loses the right to repossess those goods and must rely on a personal remedy (suing the defaulting buyer for the contract price).

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the general rule of title transfer (Nemo Dat Quod Non Habet).
Normally, a seller cannot transfer a better title than they possess, so a buyer under a retention-of-title agreement lacks full legal title until payment.
Establishing the baseline statutory rule under the Sale of Goods Act.
2
Identify statutory exceptions to the Nemo Dat rule.
Where a buyer has obtained possession of goods with the consent of the seller ('buyer in possession'), any sale by that buyer to an innocent third party acting in good faith without notice delivers valid title.
Determining whether third-party buyers are protected under commercial law.
3
Evaluate the seller's available remedies under the circumstances.
Because title has validly passed to the third-party retail customers, the original unpaid seller loses real rights over those 10 sets (right of lien or repossession) and is limited to personal remedies against the defaulting buyer for the price of the goods.
Matching statutory buyer/seller remedies to the specific factual outcome.

Key Concept

Nemo Dat Quod Non Habet Exceptions and Remedies of the Unpaid Seller
Rate this question

Topics

Sale of Goods Act: Transfer of Title, Delivery, and Buyer/Seller Remedies

More questions from this topic