Gerson (Leasing) Ltd v Michael Wilkinson & Anor [2000] EWCA Civ 250 (31 July 2000)

Gerson (Leasing) Ltd v Michael Wilkinson & Anor [2000] EWCA Civ 250 (31 July 2000)

State obtained good title to the schedule 3 goods under section 24 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 by constructive delivery through the sale and leaseback with Emshelf, who remained in possession as lessee. There was no binding contract of sale between Gerson and Sagebush, or alternatively, property was not to pass until payment, which never occurred. Wilkinson did not acquire good title to goods other than the schedule 3 goods under section 25, as Sagebush never obtained possession with Gerson's consent. Accordingly, Wilkinson is liable for conversion of goods other than the schedule 3 goods.

Citation
[2000] EWCA Civ 250
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Gerson; First Defendant/respondent: Wilkinson; Second Defendant/respondent: State
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Order of His Honour Judge Kershaw Qc, Mercantile List, Liverpool District Registry
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part.
Legal Topics
Sale of Goods, Conversion, Title to Goods, Constructive Delivery, Sale and Leaseback, Section 24 and 25 Sale of Goods Act 1979
Commercial Law Property Law Sale of Goods Conversion Title to Goods Constructive Delivery Sale and Leaseback Section 24 and 25 Sale of Goods Act 1979

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gerson

Claimant/appellant

Wilkinson

First Defendant/respondent

State

Second Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Order of His Honour Judge Kershaw Qc, Mercantile List, Liverpool District Registry

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether State obtained good title to the schedule 3 goods under section 24 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979
  2. 2 Whether there was a contract of sale between Gerson and Sagebush and if so, when property passed
  3. 3 Whether Wilkinson obtained good title under section 25 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979

Ratio Decidendi

State obtained good title to the schedule 3 goods under section 24 of the Sale of Goods Act 1979 by constructive delivery through the sale and leaseback with Emshelf, who remained in possession as lessee. There was no binding contract of sale between Gerson and Sagebush, or alternatively, property was not to pass until payment, which never occurred. Wilkinson did not acquire good title to goods other than the schedule 3 goods under section 25, as Sagebush never obtained possession with Gerson's consent. Accordingly, Wilkinson is liable for conversion of goods other than the schedule 3 goods.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part, dismissed in part.

Orders

  • Gerson's appeal against Wilkinson allowed in respect of goods other than the schedule 3 goods; Wilkinson liable for conversion of those goods.
  • Gerson's appeal against State dismissed; State and Wilkinson have good title to the schedule 3 goods.