FavoriteLoadingSave to briefcase | Rating: | By (2012)

  • PrintEmail Link
  • Viewed 13,390 times | Saved to 292 briefcases
Rowland v Divall, [1922] R 2746.

Facts:

P bought a car from D. P later sold it to X. Not discovered it was a stolen car till much later. P wants money back from D based on total failure of consideration. D said P could only make a claim for breach of warranty not rescind the K

Issue(s):

Can P recover the monies from D based on failure of consideration?

Ratio:

Where seller has breached condition of title the buyer is entitled to recover the price w/o any allowance being made for the use of the goods
When seller has no right to sell the goods in the 1st place, the buyer retains the right to reject goods at a later date then normal (treat as breach of condition not just breach of warranty)

Holding:

P is entitled to recover his monies -- got money back even though couldn't redeliver car to the seller

Comments:

There is no property in stolen goods:
** A person in possession of stolen goods does not own those goods which means they are not able to transfer title in those goods to a potential buyer.


Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to participate.

This document is a general discussion of certain legal and related issues and must not be relied upon as legal advice. This document may not have been written or reviewed by a legal practitioner. For more information, please see the website Terms of Service.