Lim Chui Lai v Zeno Ltd [1964]

By zzanzrc12812fffd8e4dcd | Updated: June 11, 2024, 3:03 p.m.

Loading...

Slideshow Video

Sign up for free!

SHARE THE AWESOMENESS

Education

create your own animated videos for free

_abc cc

* Powtoon is not liable for any 3rd party content used. It is the responsibility of each user to comply with 3rd party copyright laws.

Embed code

Select a size, the embed code changes based on your selection.

_abc Powtoon Transcript

NORHAFIZZA BINTI MOHD NAZAR
050762 BBARMT
COMMERCIAL LAW (FBS 10103)
DR HARTINIE ABD AZIZ

Lim Chui Lai v Zeno Ltd [1964]
"nemo dat quod non habet"
"No one can give what he/she doesn't have".

Any sale of possession from someone who doesn't have the ownership unless there is a permission of the right owner to sell.
Ahmad
Lim
Zeno
Lim Chui Lai v Zeno Ltd (1964)
Hi I am Zeno. Why did you come to here?
Hello Zeno. 
I am Ahmad.
I have a new contractor project so I would like to buy the raw materials from you.
Oh yes,you can.
But it is okay if I pay you after I receive the money from my client?
Ahmad this is
the materials.
Thank you Zeno.
Alright.
I already have the materials but unfortunately my client has cancelled our project.
What should I do now? I can sell this materials to Lim.
Hi Ahmad. Why did you
come to my house?
Hi Lim. I would like
to ask you something.
Do you have interest to buy the raw materials from me instead?
Oh yes, of course.
Hey what did you do with my materials? This is mine.
I am sorry sir but I have paid to Ahmad so this is my materials.
But Ahmad never paid me yet.
I am the new onwer of this materials now.
ISSUE
"Sale by person not the owner" situation.
Did Ahmad has the right to sell this materials to Lim?
Fact,Decision and Reason 
Ahmad was not the owner of the property because the respondent was merely placing the materials for the purpose of proceeding construction. Therefore, Ahmad was merely a bailee, but not the owner when the time he sold appellant. Since, Ahmad was not the owner, he had neither the title nor the authority to sell the property. 
Unless according to Sale of Good Acts 1957, section 27, where goods are sold by a person who is not the owner thereof or who does not sell them under the authority or with consent of the owner, the buyer acquires no  better title to the goods is by his conduct precluded from denying the authority to sell. 
Fact,Decision and Reason 
Although, Ahmad the insured the goods but it does't mean that he was the owner. So, there was nothing a bailee could to do with the materials. Therefore, appeal dismissed.
THANK YOU

Lim Chui Lai v Zeno Ltd [1964]

Copy this link to share with friends and colleagues:

WELCOME TO POWTOON!