Legal point

[Wait]

In a contract for the sale of goods, the buyer has become insolvent after the contract is made and has been paid. The insolvency practitioner is claiming that the goods belong to the seller and will be sold to pay of the companies debts. Can they do this or do the goods belong to the buyer?
- commercial contract subject area

[ChuckFickens]

Have you made an error in the question?

[woofgang]

Either that chuck or it's a trick question...

[ChuckFickens]

I read it about 4 times thinking "eh?"

I'm guessing it should be the seller has become insolvent.

[FredPuli43]

Depends whether title passed only on delivery of the goods or not. I take it that you mean that the seller is insolvent and all the goods are still with the seller and have not been delivered to the buyer.Then it's possible that title hasn't passed. Payment does not necessarily pass title(ownership). That makes sense in many commercial situations : If goods paid for and in transit to the buyer are already the buyer's, then he bears the loss if they are destroyed or lost before they get to him. Conversely, if he's paid but doesn't become the owner until they are delivered to him, the loss of the goods en route has to be born by the seller.

Is this a real life situation, something that's happening to real people now, or is it part of coursework ?

[tonywiltshire]

I agree with the three other contributors that the question, which looks suspiciously like a set question, should read that the seller has become insolvent not the buyer otherwise it makes little sense. As Fred says it depends whether ownership has passed to the buyer or not, ownership usually passes with payment providing the seller had title, or authority to sell the goods, but not always. There are exceptions to the seller having title but these need not be considered here.

Do come back and tell us if you are a law student or not.

[Wait]

Hey
Sorry that should have read - the seller has become insolvent
I am a law student - sorry if that's against any rules

[mike11111]

As any answer you submit will have to be supported by the relevant authorities (statute/ case law) whatever we say will not help you much.

[Wait]

Oh yes I am well aware of that - i just wanted to affiliate myself with the underlying outcome - to get a feel for the result.
P.s - I would like to thank all parties who contributed - I genuinely didn't think anyone would reply let alone concern themselves with my situations - many thanks

[Wait]

Situation*

[FredPuli43]

Wait: Welcome to the site! In the law section, we want to know whether it's a real situation so we can ask pertinent questions about the evidence available, the full circumstances etc . Simple, set, study questions only give the bare problem; there's nothing further to ask, and there's an end . (In the professional exams, in contrast, the candidate is supposed to say what further information he would want, to give a final opinion, and give answers for all the alternatives which currently present themselves in the absence of that information)

We are wary of posts which simply seem to be asking us to do all a lazy individual's course work or homework for them, that's all. But when someone is patently sincere and wants help in how to approach a question, because they're stuck, then we will help by showing them where to start.

[cathfromsaron]

in that case bit of heavy reading needed methinks ...

[tonywiltshire]

Wait, I am pleased you cleared up the point that it was the seller who was insolvent and I am not aware of any rules that preclude law students from asking questions, I echo Fred’s greetings.

[FredPuli43]

As an aside, there's an old story of a senior solicitor who received a long written opinion from a newly qualified barrister, who evidently thought an opinion was the same as an exam answer. It was therefore packed with answers an arguments for every conceivable possibilty and full of 'ifs' and lots of case law.

The solicitor wrote back "When I ask for your opinion, I want your opinion, not your doubts!"

The more senior the counsel, the briefer the answer. I once saw a senior QC's advice which consisted of one word, initialled, on the outside sheet of a huge stack of papers. It was "Yes". And his fee for that one word on the 'backsheet', 40 years ago? 5,000 guineas ( £5,250). Queen's Counsel are so grand that, by tradition, they don't sign papers; they initial them. I suppose their time is so precious that they don't want to waste time on a full signature lol.

I don't suggest that Wait follows these examples !