CHATTELS TRANSFER ACT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19045, 15 December 1923, Page 10

CHATTELS TRANSFER ACT.

AN IMPORTANT JUDGMENT. ’ *, (Fbom Oun Own GobbespondenT.) CHRISTCHURCH, December 14. An important judgment affecting security over chattels was given by Mr Justice Adams today. The case arose out of the affaire of Mr J. H. Denison, a returned soldier, in the Timaru district, to whom the Canterbury Land Board had made an advance, Denison assigning to the board, under a bill of sale, all his chattels, “which should (hereafter be acquired by him and should bo used in or about the business of farmer or grazier carried on by hint on the farm.” Later, tho Canterbury Farmers’ Cooperative Association at Timaru also advanced money to Denison, who gave it security over certain farm implements acquired by him after he had made tho assignment to .the Land Board.' He used those implements on the farm. Tho Association sold them by auction at a clearing sale on Denison's farm, £79 being realised. Tho Land Board now claimed from the Association that sum on tho ground that the implements came under the bill of sale to tho board, and were subject to tho security set out in it The association stated that it was not aware at the date of the sale that those particular implements were included in the bill of sale to the Land Board, His Honor said ho agreed that the Crown could not bo bound by any of the restrictions and disabilities imposed by tho Chattels Transfer Act, but it was contended by tho association that the Crown’s title to the implements acquired by Denison after tho date of tho bill of sale, was inequitable, only there was no doubt that tho title sot up on behalf of tho Crown was in equity. Only tho legal ownership remained with Denison, and as he had transferrer' that ownership to the association, it followed that tho association’s claim must, prevail unless it. were shown that, when it took security, it bad notice of the Crown’s prior equitable title. Counsel for the Crown argued that the registration of the bill of sale affected the association with notice of the Crown’s equitable title, but the information amounted to no more than a statement that the Crown hold chattel security from Denison, which included certain chattels riot included in the association’s security, and, which therefore did not in any way concent tho association. The doctrine of constructive notice had been freely discussed by the Court of Appeal, and it could not bo hold that there had been constructive notice in this case. Judgment would 1 be given for defendant, with costs according to scale, and disbursements, to be fixed by the registrar. Mr A. T. Donnelly fppoarod- for tho Crown, and Mr W. J. Siln for the association.