Ge Capital Bank Ltd v Rushton [2005] EWCA Civ 1556

Facts: The bank provided finance for a motor dealer to purchase motor vehicles for the purposes of its business. The agreement provided that the title to the purchased vehicles vested in the bank until the loan was repaid. The dealer could not keep up with the payments and had to take another loan from another company (J) which took a debenture from the dealer to secure the loan. To repay this loan, the dealer sold some of the vehicles to R and went into liquidation.  The bank took proceedings against J and R to take return the cars or their value.

 

Held: Appeal allowed. Section 27(2) and s.29(2) of the Act distinguished between a private purchaser who obtained the protection of the Act and a trade purchaser who did not. In this case, when R bought vehicles from T, he clearly decided to purchase the vehicles as a business venture with intention to sell them for profit. Thus, R was a trade purchaser and not a private purchaser within the meaning of the Act and he did not obtain a good title to the vehicles.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Free Registration introduction text Free Registration introduction text Free Registration introduction text

Our membership includes

Click on icons for previews
Notes icon
Notes
Essays icon
Essays
Tutorial Videos icon
Tutorial Videos
Quizzes icon
Quizzes
Study/Exam Tips icon
Study/Exam Tips
Interactive Learning Platform icon
Interactive Learning Platform
Quiz preview
Interactive Learning PLatform preview