Timeline for When does transfer of ownership occur in amateur sale-purchase contracts?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 27 at 17:44 | comment | added | user149408 | @PaŭloEbermann Indeed, I’m deleting my earlier comment. Under German law there is a similar rule: property passes when possession passes and both parties have agreed that property shall pass (§ 929 BGB). Under § 929, transferring possession is always a requirement, and parties may agree upon additional conditions (e.g. no transfer or property until the full price is paid). However, § 930 provides for a way to transfer ownership without transferring physical possession if both parties agree upon it. All of this goes for any property transfer between two parties based on a contract. | |
| May 27 at 4:54 | comment | added | Barmar | @PaŭloEbermann That sounds like the buyer is effectively loaning the item back to the seller for X time. | |
| May 27 at 0:05 | comment | added | Paŭlo Ebermann | @user149408 couldn't you say (in a contract) "the buyer will be the owner, but the seller keeps to use it for X time"? | |
| S May 26 at 12:29 | history | suggested | amalloy | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Fix a sentence that looks halfway between versions
|
| May 26 at 7:51 | comment | added | Kevin | @Tak: Unless the provision is specifically prohibited by statute, it will govern the transfer of title (i.e. whatever the contract says happens, happens, unless the law says that such a contract is illegal). | |
| May 26 at 4:46 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S May 26 at 12:29 | |||||
| May 26 at 4:08 | comment | added | Tak | @jen what about contracts that specify otherwise then? | |
| May 26 at 0:02 | comment | added | Dale M♦ | Also the rule in australia; title passes when possession passes unless the contract provides otherwise or formalities need to be complied with (e.g. motor vehicles, real estate) | |
| May 25 at 15:59 | vote | accept | Greendrake | ||
| May 25 at 14:35 | comment | added | Jen | This is the same rule at common law and in Canada. And if it were otherwise (if the buyer became the owner as soon as the contract was made), then the buyer would have an action in replevin rather than breach of contract, and special performance would effectively become an automatic remedy for the buyer rather than an exceptional remedy. | |
| May 25 at 12:30 | history | answered | bdb484 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |