Constructive trust (Ellingsen v Hallmark) (Andrew Tettenborn, 3 Oct 2000)

Of course it's just a tree. What does it look like ?

RDG online
Restitution Discussion Group Archives

Restitution
front page

What's new?

Another tree!

Archive front page

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2007

2006

2008

2009

Another tree!

<== Previous message Back to index Next message ==>

Sender:	Andrew Tettenborn
Date:	Tue, 3 Oct 2000 15:33:51 +0100
Re:	Constructive trust (Ellingsen v Hallmark)

I'm still a little sceptical about Lionel's analysis. True, there must be a restitutionary obligation in the buyer to pay for free use, etc. But was ownership of the lorry retained in order to secure it? In respect of that obligation, the seller looks to me like a bog-standard unsecured creditor.

Andrew Tettenborn MA LLB
Bracton Professor of Law

Tel: 01392-263189 / +44-392-263189 (international)
Fax: 01392-263196 / +44-392-263196 (international)
Personal Fax: 0870-0889339 / +44-870-0889339 (international)

Snailmail:
School of Law,
University of Exeter,
Amory Building,
Rennes Drive,
Exeter EX4 4RJ
England

[ Homepage: http://www.ex.ac.uk/law/ ].

<== Previous message Back to index Next message ==>

" These messages are all © their authors. Nothing in them constitutes legal advice, to anyone, on any topic, least of all Restitution. Be warned that very few propositions in Restitution command universal agreement, and certainly not this one. Have a nice day! "

»
»
»
»
»

For editorial policy, see here.
For the unedited archive, see here.
The archive editor is Steve Hedley.