Personal property: Tangible (choses in possession)

Question 1

Colonial Bank v Whinney [1885] 30 Ch.D 261

Answer 1

“All personal things are either in possession or action, The law knows no tertium quid between the two”

Question 2

Glaister-Carlisle v Glaister-Carlisle,

Answer 2

Glaister-Carlisle v Glaister-Carlisle, The Times, 22 February 1968
- having anarguement in the throws of splitting up - both want custody of dog- in a fight, one picks up the dogs and throws it at the other person in a fit of temper - was no settled intention to give

Question 3

Dewar v. Dewar [1975] 1 WLR 1532

Answer 3

The mother’s intention was to give her son a sum of money to buy a house. The son’s intention was to treat the sum of money as a loan.
The transaction was a gift, as the son (the donee) could not force his mother (the donor) to take the money back
intention of the giver (donor) - not the recipient (donee)

Question 4

Re Cole [1964] Ch 175

Answer 4

A husband bought a new house, and then showed his wife around it. He took her into each room, and showed her the various items of furniture, telling her “it’s all yours”.
Husband became bankrupt
Contents of the house were claimed by the Trustee in Bankruptcy
Wife claimed the contents belonged to her.
Held: No valid gift to the wife of the contents of the house, as no actual delivery, i.e. the donor handing over the chattels to the donee. ‘Words of gift’ are insufficient to transfer property. The Trustee’s claim succeeded.

Question 5

Lock v Heath (1892) 8 TLR 295

Answer 5

In Lock v Heath (1892) 8 TLR 295, the husband wished to give his wife a set of furniture. Only one chair was actually handed to the wife (delivered), but her husband said:
“I give you all the goods mentioned in this inventory”
and gave his wife the inventory, which listed the items in the set of furniture
Held: this constituted effective symbolic delivery to the wife of all the furniture listed in the inventory

Question 6

Thomas v. Times Book Co Ltd [1966] 1 WLR 911

Answer 6

Thomas v Times Book Company [1966] 2 All ER 241
The author Dylan Thomas left the original manuscript of ‘Under Milk Wood’ in the back of a taxi during a pub crawl. A BBC producer produced a copy of the manuscript and gave it to Dylan Thomas, who said “if you can find the original manuscript, you can have it”. Thomas then suggested various places to look for it, enabling the producer to locate the original manuscript.
If they had not found it by the time he died, it would not be suffiecent

Held: This was effective constructive delivery, as Dylan Thomas had uttered ‘words of gift’, and had put the producer in a position to take delivery of the object of the gift.

Question 7

Rawlinson v Mort (1905) 93 LT 555

Answer 7

Rawlinson v Mort (1905) 93 LT 555
involves a musical organ - words of gift were made and hands were placed on it -sufficient to be delivery