Bennet v Griffin Finance
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS,LORD JUSTICE DANCKWERTS,LORD JUSTICE WINN |
| Judgment Date | 01 December 1966 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1966] EWCA Civ J1201-4 |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
| Date | 01 December 1966 |
[1966] EWCA Civ J1201-4
In The Supreme Court of Judicature
Court of Appeal
Civil Division
From His Honour Presiding Judge, Liverpool Court Passage
The Master of the Rolls
(Lord Denning)
Lord Justice Danckwerts and
Lord Justice Winn
THE APPELLANT (Mr GEORGESON) appeared in person.
MR H. L. LACHS (instructed by Messrs Silverman Livermore & Co., Liverpool) appeared as Counsel for the Respondent.
This case raises a short tat important Point. Mr Bennett took a car on hire purchase from a firm called Griffin Finance. It was a number Hawk. He paid cash down of £50. He duly paid monthly instalments amounting to another £54. 4s.6d. Then, lo and behold, another Finance Company called Masterton Finance Ltd. wrote to him and claimed the car. Their solicitors relied on a hire purchase document which appeared to show that it was their car which they had let on hire purchase to a Mr McCormack, who had defaulted. Mr Bennett could see no answer to this claim. He stopped paying instalments to Griffin Finance. Now he sues Griffin Finance for the payments that he had made to them of £104. 4s.6d. on the ground that they had no title to the ear which they had purported to let to him. The Judge held in favour of Mr Bennett. He gave judgment against Griffin Finance for £104. 4s.6d., saying: "I find reluctantly that the defendants did not have title". Griffin Finance now appeal to this Court. They have appeared in person by Mr Georgeson, one of the partners, who has put their case before us.
The history of the Humber Hawk is this: In 1957 Mr Henshaw got it on hire purchase from United Dominions Trust (Commercial) Ltd. The total hire purchase price was £701. 10s.0d Mr Henshaw paid the deposit and duly kept up the instalments. Then in November 1959 he decided to sell it. He agreed to sell it to a Mr McCormack for £200. He handed over the car to Mr McCormack who gave him a cheque for £200. But, of course, this sale would not be effective unless United Dominions Trust were paid the "settlement figure" to clear off their interest. This was £87. 5s.5d. Mr McCormack, moreover, had not the money in the bank to meet the cheque for £200. He raised the money in this way. He went to see some dealers whom he knew called J. & P. Motors. They filled in documents purporting to record a hire purchase transaction with Masterton Finance: whereby Masterton Finance bought the car from J. & P. Motorsand let it out on hire purchase to Mr McCormack. She Judge found that the transaction was "completely fictitious". J. & P. Motors had no title to the ear. They had not bought it and had no right to sell it to Masterton Finance. On receiving these documents, Masterton Finance paid United Dominions Trust the settlement figure of £87. 5s.5d., thus getting rid of their interest: and they paid £262, 4s.7d. to J. & P. Motors, who appear to hare handed it to Mr McCormack, and by this means Mr McCormack honoured his cheque to Mr Henshaw. Thus Mr McCormack got the car without paying a penny out of his own pocket. He kept it for a little while and then sold it to a man called Williams for £25. Mr Williams said it looked as if it had been in a collision. He did a lot of work on the car and sold it to Georgesons Garage for £12o. Then Georgesons Garage sold it to Griffin...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Snook v London and West Riding Investments Ltd
...presumed to have paid it on be half of Mr Snook. With the result that Mr Snook became the owner of the car, see the recent case of Pennett v. Griffin Finance, not yet reported. Auto-Finance never bougth the car from Mr Snook, nor his interest in it They never paid him a penny for his contra......
-
Halpin v Rothwell
...to the transaction which, in fact, took place, I am prepared to follow the authority of the decision in Bennett .v. Griffin Finance Co., (1967) 2 QB 46, and to hold that the hire-purchase company had no authority or title to sell the lorry to the Plaintiff on the day when the property pass......
-
Phillip Drakard Trading Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise
...in the judgment: Apple and Pear Development Council v C & E Commrs (Case 102/86)TAX[1988] BTC 5116 Bennett v Griffin Finance (a firm) ELR[1967] 2 QB 46 C & E Commrs v Oliver VAT(1979) 1 BVC 314 Edwards (HMIT) v Bairstow & Anor ELR[1956] AC 14 Garnac Grain Co Inc v HMF Faure & Fairclough Ltd......
-
Phillip Drakard Trading Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise
...Tribunal Phillip Drakard Trading Ltd The following cases were referred to in the decision: Bennett v Griffin Finance ELR[1967] 2 QB 46 (CA) Flockton (Ian) Developments Ltd v C & E Commrs VAT(1987) 3 BVC 23 Lord Advocate v Largs Golf Club VAT(1985) 2 BVC 200,063 Wallman Foods Ltd VATUNK(1983......