The cases stated here may no longer be relevant but they may provide the reader with a different perspective on their situation, on the facts
Nemo Dat – can title to stolen property be acquired? Seemingly not as Nemo dat quod non habet – ‘no one can give what they do not have’; someone who steals gains possession of the taken item, not title. In turn, they can pass possession, not title. The title rests with the original owner, the person from whom the property as taken.
Costello vs Derbyshire Police 2021 – (summary) if property, which is believed to be stolen, cannot be identified who can be approached as a victim, who has a better claim to title than the person (suspect) found in possession of it?
Derbyshire legal department was none too happy about this and a chap working for the police, Mr Lord, set about trying to promote Lord’s Law. In brief, he felt a vehicle purchased should be required to undertake further due diligence pre-purchase of a vehicle and if sought, evidence this had occurred. A single meeting on the subject appears to have been sufficient to dismiss the idea.
Further matters cited about vehicle title:
Gough and Another v The Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police: CA 2 Mar 2004 – a dispute about ‘suspected’ stolen vehicle parts.
Webb vs. THE CHIEF CONSTABLE OF MERSEYSIDE 1999. the arguments again were related to …’in the absence of any evidence that anybody else is the true owner, once the police right of retention comes to an end, the person from whom they were compulsorily taken is entitled to possession‘.
Lewis & Averay (1971) – can title to property obtained by fraud be acquired?
Shogun Finance Ltd v Hudson – [2003] UKHL 62. English contract law case decided in the House of Lords, on the subject of mistaken identity as a basis for rescission of a contract. The case has been the subject of much criticism in failing to effectively clarify the area of mistake to identity (Wikipedia)
Website Disclaimer
The information provided on this website is for general informational and research purposes only. While we strive to ensure that all content is accurate, up to date, and relevant, laws and regulations are constantly evolving. As such, the information presented may not reflect the most current legal standards or interpretations.
Nothing on this website should be construed as legal advice or a substitute for professional legal counsel. If you require legal assistance or advice specific to your circumstances, you should consult a qualified lawyer.
We accept no responsibility or liability for any errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in the content, nor for any reliance placed upon the information provided. The use of this website and its content is entirely at your own risk.
By continuing to use this website, you acknowledge and agree to these terms.