The issue raised is the debtor(Ahmad) defaulted in paying monthly installment to the creditor(Easy Bank Bhd) which causes the creditor to repossessed the car. Ahmad has no right to oppose the term as he bought the car from the person that is not the owner, and the seller has no authority. Thus, the buyer does not acquire any title on the items. This refers to Nemo dat quad non habet in section 27 of the Sale of Goods Act.
To enlighten the fact, a preview to the case study of Lim Chui Lai v. Zeno. LTD is made. Ahmad is not the owner of the property; however, he had sold the materials. Ahmad was not the owner of the property because the respondent was merely placing the material for proceeding construction. Therefore, Ahmad was merely a bailey, but not the owner by the time when he sold it to the appellant. Since Ahmad is not the owner, nor he had the title, he had no authority to sell the property. Since this case is crystal clear, Ahmad, in this situation should not has any objection when Easy Bank Bhd repossessed his car as he has no title, and he merely have the authority on the item.
There is, however, another thing that you could consider in this situation. There is also the Right of unpaid seller against the Goods. It is defined as either; a) when the whole of the price has not been paid or tendered; or, b) when a bill of exchange or other negotiable instrument has been received as conditional payment, and the condition on which it was received has not been fulfilled by reason of the dishonour of the instrument or otherwise. In this context, the term ‘seller’ includes any person in the position of a seller, as, for instance, an agent of the seller to whom the bill of landing has been endorsed, or a consignor or agent who has himself paid, or directly responsible for the price. Thus, in this situation Easy Bank Bhd is as the seller as they have the title and the authority towards the item.
Listing Agreement (now called a service provisions agreement) 1. A type of employment agreement between a principal and a agent 2. It authorizes the broker to try to find (procuring cause) a ready, willing and able buyer on terms acceptable to the seller. Parties 1. Seller is the principal 2. The broker is the agent 3. Salespeople are the sub-agents of the seller 4. Cooperating broker is the agent ...
Due to that, Easy Bank Bhd has unpaid seller’s right which subject to the provisions of the Act and any law for the time being in force, notwithstanding that the property in the goods may have passed to the buyer, the unpaid seller of goods, as such, has the implications of the law. They are; a) a lien on the goods for the price while he is in possession of them; b) in case of the insolvency of the buyer a right of stopping the goods in transit after he has parted with the possession of them; c) a right of re-sale as limited by this Act.
Where the property in goods has not passed to the buyer, the unpaid seller has, in addition to his other remedies, a right of withholding delivery similar to and co-extensive with his rights of lien and stoppage in transit where the property has passed to the buyer. This refer to Section 31, Sale of Goods Act. Delivery: it is the duty of the seller to deliver the goods whilst the buyer’s duty is to accept and pay for them in accordance with the terms of the contract of sale. Both Ahmad and Easy Bank Bhd are bound with the contract, because of Ahmad did not pay for the instalment for 2 months; Ahmad has perform a breach of contract. In this case, the bank has the right to sue for remedies or claim back the car from Ahmad (the debtor), and the bank has the right to resell back the car. If the debtor (Ahmad) wanted to claim back his car, Ahmad has to pay the bank for the two (2) months arrears. The bank also has the right to renew or cancel the contract.
If the owner made a misrepresentation in the course of negotiations leading to the hire-purchase agreement, the hirer has the right to rescind the agreement and sue for damages, section 8(1)(a), Hire-Purchase Act. It is common for hirers to obtain goods from dealers who are not financial institutions. In such cases, the dealer “sells” the goods to the finance company, which will in turn enter into a hire-purchase agreement. In event that the dealer has made a misrepresentation, the hirer cannot repudiate the agreement. He can only sue for damages, section 8(1)(b), Hire-Purchase Act. In this case, Easy Bank has not made any misrepresentation to Ahmad. The problem occur when Ahmad did not paid the monthly installment for two(2) month.
Illness is ‘a state of poor health’.’If a person has an illness they can experience a range of different symptoms, and tests may not always identify the cause as it could be just a cold or a cough. Illnesses identify a condition that exists which causes someone harm or pain. Also being ill usually requires the patient’s condition to be classified according to the medical knowledge and practise. If ...
Section to 15 of the Hire-Purchase Act provide for the rights of hirers. The hirer has the following rights: A) To be supplied documents and information, section 9, Hire-Purchase Act. B) To require the owner to appropriate payments made in hire purchase agreements, section 10, Hire-Purchase Act. C) To apply to the Magistrate’s Court for an order approving the removal of the goods to another place, section 11, Hire-Purchase Act. Ahmad only has the right to apply to the Magistrate Courts under section 11 for an order to approve the removal of the goods to another place which Easy Bank had not represent to Ahmad before the Bank repossessed the car from Ahmad.
At common, the bank has the right to recover possession of the goods if the Ahmad commits a breach of his obligations under the hire-purchase agreement. The hire-purchase act lays down various restrictions on the power of the owner as means of protecting the hirer, section 16 to 19. The restrictions are as follows; A) Notice must be given to the hirer when goods are to be repossessed, section 16. B) After possession, the owner must not sell or dispose of the goods for twenty-one days, section 17. C) Hire’s rights and immunities when goods are repossessed, section 18. D) Hirer can regain possession of the goods in certain circumstances, section 19. In this situation, Ahmad have not been given any notice by the Easy Bank Bhd, at the earliest before they repossessed back the car. Thus, Ahmad has the right to proclaim to the bank as the indicated law that falls under section 16.
The conclusion is Ahmad has the right to proclaim the car from Easy Bank as he does not receive any notice of the repossession and the approval from Magistrate Court before the car was repossessed. Other than that, Ahmad should be given at least three(3)months with a letter of notice from Easy Bank before repossessing the car. Easy Bank could not sold the car for 21 days which means they have to hold the item before any further actions. Ahmad could repossessed back the car by settling the payment of the two(2) months of monthly installment.
Imagine that a convicted child molester is released from jail and that he is now traveling around the country looking for work. One day this criminal returns to his old ways and he attacks a young child whose dead body is found in a deserted field the following day. The only trace of evidence at the crime scene is a semen specimen on the boys clothes. Now this specimen could be useful if the ...