Abstract
Contracts term of commercial sale of goods have a ‘title retention clause’, preventing the transfer of ownership till the seller is fully paid. The unpaid seller gets the right to repossess the goods from the buyer. Exigencies of businesses have led to introduction of further clauses allowing the buyer to use or sub-sell the goods even before the transfer of ownership. The United Kingdom Court of Appeal judgment in the Caterpillar Case brings out the effects of the contradictions of a title retention clause qualified by the right of the buyer to use or sub-sell.
Additional Information
| Product Type | Case |
|---|---|
| Reference No. | BP0428 |
| Title | The Two Sides of the Title Retention Clauses: The Caterpillar Case |
| Pages | 9 |
| Published on | Feb 12, 2019 |
| Year of Event | 2010 |
| Authors | Pathak, Akhileshwar; |
| Area | Strategy (STR) |
| Discipline | Public Policy and Law |
| Learning Objective | Transfer of ownership in a sale contract. Structure and benefits of title retention clauses. Disadvantage of title retention clauses. |
| Keywords | Unpaid sellers; Transfer of Ownership; Sale of goods; Title Retention Clause |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Access | For All |
My Cart
You have no items
in your shopping cart.