Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly
RETENTION OF TITLE AND IMPLIED AUTHORITY TO PASS TITLE TO SUB-BUYERS
Fairfax v. Capital Bank
It is rare these days for litigation concerning retention of title clauses to reach the Court of Appeal in England. In Fairfax Gerrard Holdings Ltd and others v. Capital Bank Plc,1 the three claimants, FGH, FGI and Assetline, were part of a corporate group in the business of trade finance.2 The claimants’ role in the transaction in question was to finance Dimond’s acquisition of a machine for sub-sale to Print Factory or to Carrprint. The machine was acquired from a Chinese supplier. The claimants then contracted to sell the
1. [2007] EWCA Civ 1226; [2008] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 297. The leading judgment was delivered by Waller LJ, with whom Dyson and Hughes LJJ agreed.
2. This note will not discuss the nice question which of these companies is the proper claimant in a conversion action and which may assert retention of title under the sale agreement with Dimond.
LLOYD’S MARITIME AND COMMERCIAL LAW QUARTERLY
428