Walsh v Tattersall

The High Court of Australia considered the dispute between Walsh and Tattersall concerning the ownership of a motor vehicle. The central issue was whether the respondent, Tattersall, had acquired title to the vehicle through a sale that occurred while the vehicle was subject to a hire-purchase agreement with the appellant, Walsh.

The High Court was required to determine whether the sale of the vehicle by the hirer to Tattersall was valid and effective in passing title, notwithstanding the existence of the hire-purchase agreement. This involved considering the legal effect of the hirer's possession of the vehicle under the agreement and the principles of sale of goods, particularly in circumstances where the seller may not have had full title.

The Court ultimately held that the sale was not valid. Applying the principles of nemo dat quod non habet (one cannot give what one does not have), the Court found that the hirer, not being the owner of the vehicle, could not pass good title to Tattersall. The hire-purchase agreement meant that ownership remained with Walsh, the owner, and the hirer's possession did not confer the power to sell the vehicle.

Consequently, the High Court ordered that the vehicle be returned to Walsh.