Retention of Title (Gordon Goldberg, 21 Feb 1999)

Of course it's just a tree. What does it look like ?

RDG online
Restitution Discussion Group Archives

Restitution
front page

What's new?

Another tree!

Archive front page

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2007

2006

2008

2009

Another tree!

<== Previous message Back to index Next message ==>

Sender:	Gordon Goldberg
Date:	Sun, 21 Feb 1999 15:41:16
Re:	Retention of Title

I thank Andrew Tettenborn and Lionel Smith for their answers to my message of the 15th Feb. My continuing difficulty is that I cannot reconcile with principle and authority the hypothetical reliance on the common count of money had and received by Robert Goff, L.J., in Clough Mill Ltd. v. Martin [1985] 1 W.L.R. 111 at 117A-118E. I can find no help in Westdeutsche Bank v. Islington L.B.C. Though I agree with Lord Goff that it cannot have overruled Sinclair v. Brougham, Neil Cawley and I have respectfully submitted - [1997] L.M.C.L.Q. 406 at 411 n.17 - that in it his Lordship misinterpreted the "annuity cases".

<== Previous message Back to index Next message ==>

" These messages are all © their authors. Nothing in them constitutes legal advice, to anyone, on any topic, least of all Restitution. Be warned that very few propositions in Restitution command universal agreement, and certainly not this one. Have a nice day! "

»
»
»
»
»

For editorial policy, see here.
For the unedited archive, see here.
The archive editor is Steve Hedley.