This is an extract of our Divesting Ownership Of Goods document, which we sell as part of our LAWS203 Property Law Notes collection written by the top tier of Univerity Of Otago students.
The following is a more accessble plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our LAWS203 Property Law Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:
Divesting ownership of goods Original title is possible in two ways:
1. Res nullius - claiming previously unclaimed goods
2. Res derelicta - claiming abandoned goods Otherwise, title will bee gained through transfer from others, either gratuitously or for value. Gifts A gift of goods requires three elements:
1. Objectively assessed expression of intention by donor to make a gift
2. Acceptance by donee
Williams v Williams Interfamily 'gift' of Pianola.
1) Yes, as father told son he was gifting it.
1) No, as pianola was never physically moved, and there was never an overt act to symbolise delivery. 2) Most obvious symbol: to deliver the key to a chattel/property. Rowland v Stevenson  NSWSC Stevenson gifted his yacht the "Queen Bee" to Rowland at a yacht club.
1. Intention - yes, had expressly said he would give it over a long period of time, but materially at point of delivery.
2. Acceptance - yes.
3. Delivery - yes. Boat didn't physically move from its moor, but was given keys. Once the gifting process is complete, the gift is irrevocable: title passes, and the donor has no claim to the chattel. If process is incomplete, then donor can revoke the gift and maintain possession.
Sale of Goods s3(1) Sale of Goods Act "Contract of sale of goods whereby a seller transfers/agrees to transfer the property in goods to the buyer for a money consi deration called the 'price'." When does property pass?
Section 19(1) SoGA, Title is transferred at such time as the parties to the contract intend it to be transferred. 19(2) - Intention is to be ascertained through
* Terms of contract
* Conduct of parties
* Circumstances of the case Isaac v Unpaid Farmers in Weddel Receivership Isaac = receiver. Weddel went bankrupt, unpaid farmers were creditors. Weddel possessed many carcasses , the question was who owned them. The farmers didn't want to have the carcasses liquidated and to receive a percentage, wanted the carcasses back directly.
* The "kill report" Weddel and the Farmers used included cl3(a), "property in stock delivered to Weddel shall not pass to Wedde l"
? CA found that this was anachronistic: neither party relied on the kill report or intended to be bound by it.
* Instead looked at the parties' conduct in the circumstances:
? W decided which stock to keep and reject
? W met costs of collection, storage, slaughter, marketing and freight
* (wouldn't have met these costs if not their own property)
? Farmers had no involvement, exercised no rights post slaughter (except for rejected stock)
? Payment came long after
* CA found that property passed when W accepted stock. Agreements to sell If property is to be transferred in the future or upon the fulfilment of some condition, there is an agreement to sell, which gives contractual (not property) rights. Agreements to sell become sales when the future time arrives, or when the necessary condition is fulfilled. Unascertained goods Where the goods of a contract of sale are unascertained, no property is transferred until the goods are ascertained. Property cannot pass until a specific good is appropriated to the transaction. (Rule 5) Default rules - Sale of Goods Act s 20. Unless a contrary intention appears: (i.e. USE s19 FIRST)
1. Rule 1 - If there is an a) Unconditional contract for the sale of b) Specific goods, c) In a deliverable state, Property passes to the buyer when the contract is made Property Page 8
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our LAWS203 Property Law Notes.