Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
Related Content
CASE STUDY

“Because of the pure breadth and depth of black letter law research and practical guidance that LexisNexis provides, we don't have to rely on counsel as much as perhaps firms that don't use LexisNexis.”

KaurMaxwell

Access all documents on Nemo dat rule

Nemo dat rule meaning

What does Nemo dat rule mean?
In practice, the nemo dat rule means a person who is not the owner, or who lacks authority from the owner, cannot transfer to a buyer a better title to land or goods than they themselves have. A buyer from a thief or an unauthorised seller generally acquires no title. The rule is a common law principle (nemo dat quod non habet) used across property law. For goods, it is reflected in legislation: in the UK by the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and related statutes; in Ireland by the Sale of Goods Acts 1893–1980. Typical statutory and common law exceptions include: estoppel by the true owner; sales under voidable title before rescission; disposition by a mercantile agent acting within apparent authority; sales under statutory or court powers; and the “seller/buyer in possession” rules. These provisions aim to balance protection of the true owner with commercial certainty for good faith purchasers. For land, registration regimes modify nemo dat. Purchasers relying on the register may take free of certain unprotected or off-register interests (subject to fraud and overriding/protected interests), and Scotland’s system includes statutory “realignment” for good faith acquirers. Across England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland, the core principle is consistent,...
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related News about Nemo dat rule

NEWS
US Ninth Circuit applies California choice‑of‑law; Spanish law governs, conferring prescriptive title on Thyssen‑Bornemisza to Nazi‑looted Pissarro despite California’s nemo dat rule

A three-judge bench of the Ninth Circuit, in a published ruling, held that Spain’s state-run Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection is the rightful owner of the painting ‘Rue Saint-Honoré, après-midi, effet de pluie’, a 19th-century piece by the French Impressionist Camille Pissarro, reportedly valued in the tens of millions of dollars. The bench found that, under Spanish law, the museum had acquired title by prescription because it bought the work without knowledge of the theft and possessed it for a sufficient period to obtain ownership, thereby meeting the requirements for acquisitive possession under that legal system. The outcome marks a setback for the California claimant who brought the suit nearly twenty years ago — David Cassirer, great-grandson of Holocaust survivor Lilly Neubauer, from whom the painting was taken as she fled Germany in 1939 — and follows almost two years after the US Supreme Court set aside an earlier judgment in which the Ninth Circuit had likewise favoured the museum. In April 2022, the justices determined that the Ninth Circuit had relied on...

Read More Right Arrow