Conway v Critchley

The matter before the court involved the plaintiff, Conway, who sought an order for the defendants, Critchley, to deliver up wine, plant, and equipment at their winery. The defendants had sold the winery to a third party but retained possession of these items. Conway claimed that the sale of the winery did not transfer ownership of the wine, plant, and equipment, and therefore he was entitled to their possession. The court was required to determine whether the sale of the winery included the wine, plant, and equipment and, if not, whether Conway was entitled to possession.

The court found that the sale of the winery did not transfer ownership of the wine, plant, and equipment. The sale deed specified that the sale was of the winery only, without any mention of the wine, plant, and equipment. The court held that these items were not included in the sale and therefore remained the property of Conway. The court also rejected the defendants' argument that Conway had waived his right to possession by not removing the items after the sale. The court found that Conway had not been aware that the items had not been included in the sale and therefore could not be said to have waived his rights.

The court granted Conway's claim for an order that the defendants deliver up the plant and equipment. The court also rejected the defendants' late claim for the cost of repairs to the equipment, finding that it was not reasonable for the defendants to have incurred such costs without first seeking Conway's consent. The court granted the defendants leave to file a cross-claim for the cost of repairs, but found that the defendants had not provided sufficient evidence to support their claim. The court made an order that the defendants deliver up the plant and equipment to Conway, and dismissed the defendants' cross-claim for the cost of repairs.