Key Takeaways

  • A sale by non-owner occurs when goods are sold by someone without legal ownership or authority to sell them.
  • The nemo dat quod non habet principle means a seller cannot transfer better title than they have—but there are important exceptions to protect innocent purchasers.
  • Exceptions arise under statutory provisions (e.g., the Sale of Goods Act 1979, Factors Act 1889, Hire Purchase Act 1964) and through doctrines such as estoppel.
  • Courts balance protecting the original owner with safeguarding the interests of buyers who purchase in good faith.
  • Specific legal doctrines such as market overt, voidable title, and seller in possession can allow a buyer to obtain good title even from a non-owner.
  • Real estate and personal property transactions differ, but both are subject to nemo dat and its exceptions.
  • Buyers are generally advised to conduct due diligence before purchasing property to avoid risks of defective title.

A sale by non-owner in business law occurs when goods are sold by a person who is not the owner without the owner's permission. Only the person who owns the title to a piece of property, whether that is personal property or real estate, can transfer the title to someone else.

Nemo dat quod non habet is a legal term that's often abbreviated to nemo dat. It simply means no one can transfer what they don't have. As such, a seller can only transfer ownership to a buyer if he possesses the right to do so. Nemo dat may apply if a seller sells stolen goods without the rights to them or a buyer purchases stolen goods.

Nemo Dat Exceptions

Nemo dat protects the rightful owner of a piece of property, precluding the innocent purchaser from maintaining ownership of the title. However, there are several exceptions to the rule. Each exception is contained in one of the following acts:

  • The Sale of Goods Act 1979 (SGA)
  • The Factors Act 1889 (FA)
  • The Hire Purchase Act 1964 (HPA)

When any of these exceptions are enacted, the rightful owner of the property loses ownership of the title in favor of the purchaser. In essence, these exceptions protect the innocent purchaser.

Here's an example of a scenario where the transfer of ownership to a non-owner may arise:

  • Mr. Smith steals a piece of property and sells it to Mr. Jones.
  • Then, Mr. Smith sells another piece of property to Mr. Murphy but retains possession of it while wrongfully selling it again to Mr. Napoli.
  • Mr. Smith then passes the property to Mr. Jones in search of an offer for sale. Meanwhile, Mr. Jones goes on to sell the property without Mr. Smith's authority and maintains the proceeds from the sale.
  • Mr. Smith buys the piece of property on credit and resells it to Mr. Jones, with no intention of paying for the property.

This situation becomes tricky when you pause to consider why the two innocent parties should suffer at the hands of one deviant.

Additional Statutory Exceptions

Beyond the broad statutory protections already mentioned, there are several additional exceptions where a sale by non-owner may still pass valid title to the buyer:

  • Sale under a voidable title: If the seller obtained goods under a voidable contract (e.g., by fraud) but the contract has not yet been rescinded at the time of sale, the buyer who acts in good faith and without notice of the defect can obtain good title.
  • Seller in possession after sale: If a seller has already sold goods but remains in possession and resells them to another buyer acting in good faith, the subsequent buyer may gain valid title under the Factors Act.
  • Buyer in possession before payment: If a buyer obtains goods with the consent of the seller before paying in full, and then resells them, the sub-buyer may obtain good title if acting in good faith.
  • Sales under statutory or court authority: Transfers made by sheriffs, receivers, or liquidators are protected, even though these parties are not the original owners.

These provisions demonstrate how the law balances commercial certainty with the rights of the true owner.

Denning LJ in Bishopgate Motor Finance Corporation Ltd. v. Transport Brakes Ltd. (1949)

These exceptions are illustrated well in Denning LJ in Bishopgate Motor Finance Corporation Ltd. v. Transport Brakes Ltd. (1949). There were a couple elements at play in this case.

First, the courts were seeking to protect the property. Shouldn't it be true that no one can give away a title if he doesn't possess it? Second, the courts were seeking to protect commercial transactions. Shouldn't the person who makes a purchase in good faith receive a fair title?

The first consideration demonstrated by Denning LJ can be seen in the Sale of Goods Act 1979. Since the implementation of this act, whenever goods are sold by someone who is not the rightful owner, the buyer does not acquire a valid title.

Good Faith and the Rights of Innocent Purchasers

One of the central tensions in sales by non-owner cases is the protection of innocent purchasers. Buyers who acquire goods in good faith, without knowledge of any defect in title, often rely on the fairness of being able to retain ownership. Courts have recognized that refusing to protect such buyers could undermine commerce and public confidence in trade.

For example, commercial law recognizes that requiring every buyer to exhaustively investigate the seller’s ownership would be impractical. Instead, the law sometimes prioritizes the efficiency and reliability of transactions by granting ownership to the bona fide purchaser while leaving the original owner to pursue remedies against the wrongdoer.

Estoppel

Estoppel occurs in cases where the owner of the piece of property acts in a manner in which the seller has the right to sell the piece of property. As such, the rightful owner is prevented (estopped) from making a claim against the seller. In such a scenario, the purchaser may then go on to become the rightful owner of the goods.

Two further distinctions of estoppel may arise. They are:

  • Estoppel by Representation
  • Estoppel by Negligence

Estoppel by representation occurs when the owner of the piece of property has, either in his words or conduct, led the buyer to believe that the seller is the true owner of the property, or at least has the right to sell them. This form of estoppel is also known as estoppel by words or estoppel by conduct.

Estoppel by negligence occurs when the owner of the property has, through negligence, allowed the seller to appear before the buyer as the true owner, or as one who possesses the authority to transfer ownership of the property. For this form of estoppel to take place, it must be proven that the owner of the property had a responsibility to take care of it, so as not to act negligently, but did so anyway.

Practical Applications and Property Context

In practice, estoppel is especially relevant in real estate transactions. If an owner’s conduct (such as leaving another party in apparent control of a property) leads a buyer to reasonably believe that the seller has authority, the owner may be prevented from later challenging the sale.

For example, if a property owner knowingly allows another person to market and negotiate a sale on their behalf without clarifying limits to their authority, courts may find that estoppel applies. Similarly, in personal property sales, an owner’s failure to safeguard goods from being resold may estop them from disputing the buyer’s title.

This principle underlines the importance of responsible behavior by owners to avoid enabling unauthorized sales.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is a sale by non-owner in business law?

It occurs when someone sells goods or property without owning them or having authority to sell. Generally, the buyer does not acquire valid title unless an exception applies.

2. What is the nemo dat rule?

Nemo dat quod non habet means “no one can give what they do not have.” A seller cannot transfer better ownership rights than they possess.

3. Are there exceptions to nemo dat?

Yes. Statutes such as the Sale of Goods Act and doctrines like estoppel, voidable title, and seller in possession create exceptions that protect innocent purchasers.

4. Does estoppel apply to real estate sales?

Yes. If an owner’s conduct leads a buyer to reasonably believe a seller had authority, the owner may be estopped from denying the sale.

5. How can buyers protect themselves from a sale by non-owner?

Buyers should perform due diligence, request proof of ownership, and verify authority before completing a transaction. This reduces the risk of defective title.

If you need help with sale by a non-owner in business law, you can post your legal need on UpCounsel's marketplace. UpCounsel accepts only the top 5 percent of lawyers to its site. Lawyers on UpCounsel come from law schools such as Harvard Law and Yale Law and average 14 years of legal experience, including work with or on behalf of companies like Google, Menlo Ventures, and Airbnb