Page:Halsbury Laws of England v1 1907.pdf/778

 —

—

Bailment.

556 Sect.

1127. The owner ment may assign

on a hire-purchase agreeinterest in it, and all rights and liabilities connected therewith, to a third party. The transferee, upon notice in writing of the assignment being given to the hirer, will become entitled to receive the instalments of rent from the hirer as they accrue, and the hirer cannot set up such transfer as an excuse for refusing to pay further instalments

3.

Hire-

Purchase. Assignment.

of a chattel let out

all

his

(s). Such an assignment does not operate as a bill of sale within the meaning of sect. 4 of the Bills of Sale Act, 1878 (0. A licence by the hirer to the original letter to enter and take possession of the chattel upon default of payment of any instalment, is not capable of assignment to a third party {u). In order to perfect an assignment of an owner's interest in a hirepurchase agreement to a third party, it is necessary that the transfer should be accompanied by the same formalities as are essential to making the original security effective (a).

under the agreement

Conversion

by

the hirer of a chattel under a hire-purchase agreement over to an auctioneer for the purpose of sale, and so determines the bailment and converts it to his own use, the true owner is entitled to recover damages for the conversion from the auctioneer if he refuses to deliver it up or sells it {b). He is similarly entitled as against a purchaser (c), a pledgee (rf), or an equitable mortgagee (e) from the hirer, even though the chattel may have been received in good faith and without notice.

1128.

hirer.

delivers

If

it

Sect.

4.

Hire of Work and Labour, Sub-Sect.

Hire of work

1.

In General.

1129. This class of bailment (locatio operis faciendi) is a contract in which one of the two contracting parties undertakes to do something to a chattel, e.g., to carry it or to repair it, in consideration of a price to be paid to him (/).

and labour.

It is essential to constitute a valid contract of this description that there should be some work to be performed in connection with a specified chattel, and that money should be agreed to be paid as the price of the labour (g).

AND

Insolveis^cy



Re

Tliackrah,

Ex

parte Hughes and

Kimber

(1888), 5 Morr.

235.

Waggon

(s)

British

(t)

Re Davis

Ex

Lea cfc Co. (1880), 5 Q. B. D. 149. Re Isaacson, parte Rawlings (1888), 22 Q. B. D. 193 Neidove v. Shreivsbury (1888), 21 Q. B. D. Q. B. 333

Co. v.

Ex

dc Co.,

parte Mason, [1895]

1





41. (u)

Re Davis

(k Co.,

Ex

parte Rawlings, supra,

(a) Jarvis v. Jarvis (1893), 63 L. J. (cH.) 10. (6) Consolidated Co. v. Curtis cfc Son, [1892] 1

(1879),

40 L. T. 744



Loeschman

v.

Machin

Cochrane v. Rymill Q. B. 495 (1818), 2 Stark. 311.

(c) Cooper v. Willomatt (1845), 14 L. J. (c. P.) 219 ; Marner v. Bankes (1867), 16 W. E. 62. {d) Singer Manufacturing Co. v. Clark (1879), 5 Ex. D. 37. (e) Re Samuel Allen cfc Sons, Ltd., [1907] 1 Ch. 575. As to work and labour in (/) Jones on Bailments, 4th ed. pp. 90, 91.

Wokk and Labour

.

general, see title (g) Pothier. Contrat (1846), 2 C. B. 905.



as to carriers, see title Carriers.

du Louage d'Ouvrage,

ss.

397—402



Keys

v.

Harwood