Dear Colleagues;
Apologies if others have noted this already and I missed it, but it strikes me that the recent decision of the SCC in
i Trade Finance Inc. v. Bank of Montreal, 2011 SCC 26 (CanLII)(20 May 2011) http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2011/2011scc26/2011scc26.html would be of interest to those interested in unjust enrichment and tracing issues. List members Lionel Smith and Angela Swan are cited. As a I read it the bottom line was that the Bank, in taking security over some shares which were purchased with fraudulently obtained funds, but without notice of the fraud, was entitled to be protected by the equitable defence of bone fide purchaser for value without notice. But there are also some interesting comments on the effects of Ontario's personal property securities legislation, a version of which is about to commence in Australia.Regards
Neil
Neil Foster,
Senior Lecturer,
Deputy Head of School & LLB Program Convenor,
Newcastle Law School,
Faculty of Business & Law.
MC158, McMullin Building,
University of Newcastle, Callaghan NSW 2308 AUSTRALIA
ph 02 4921 7430
fax 02 4921 6931
====
This message was delivered through the Restitution Discussion Group,
an international internet LISTSERV devoted to all aspects of the law
of unjust enrichment. To subscribe, send "subscribe enrichment" in
the body of a message to <listserv@lists.mcgill.ca>. To unsubscribe,
send "signoff enrichment" to the same address. To make a posting to
all group members, send to <enrichment@lists.mcgill.ca>. The list is
run by Lionel Smith of McGill University, <lionel.smith@mcgill.ca>.