[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-291598-105":59,"doc-detail-291598-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","chapter-6-title-talk","Chapter 6 - Title Talk","","Chapter 6 presents William Swadling’s discussion of legal language under the Sale of Goods Act, focusing on how “Property” and “Title” are used when determining buyers’ rights. The chapter traces statutory phrasing and explains why definitions and distinctions matter, including the contrast between physical goods and property interests, and the interpretive challenges of undefined terms like general and special property. It also introduces the rule nemo dat quod non habet to clarify how title operates when goods are sold by non-owners.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":15,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/literature/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/chapter-6-title-talk/291598/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/chapter-6-title-talk/291598.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Aladdin","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-09-17",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":29},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What is the chapter’s main focus?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"It examines how the Sale of Goods Act uses the terms “Property” and “Title” and why their meanings affect purchasers’ rights in contracts for the sale of goods.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How does the chapter distinguish “property” from the physical goods?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"It explains that the legislation differentiates the goods themselves from the property rights in those goods, which matter for sale agreements and doctrines like retention of title.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What legal principle related to title does the chapter introduce?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"It cites nemo dat quod non habet, stating that when someone sells goods without being the owner and without authority or consent, the buyer acquires no better title than the seller had.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},291598,1790146223,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":14,"category_name":15,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":29,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},2336478503145,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_276721f389ce27ea32af1340a28f341c","Chapter 6  \nTitle Talk  \nWilliam Swadling  \n1. Introduction  \nTan Yock Lin was both a gentleman of the law and more generally. I first met him over two decades ago, when I came to the National University of Singapore to devise and teach a course on the Law of Personal Property. I was to give the lectures and Yock Lin and Disa Sim, now a partner at Rajah and Tann, were to take the tutorials, eventually taking over the running of the course. Yock Lin met me at Changi Airport, drove me to my hotel, helped me check-in, and then took me for dinner. We became friends and would meet up whenever I was in Singapore. Indeed, I met him for a pleasant lunch in the Botanic Gardens just before his retirement. He was looking forward to many years of well-earned rest. Unfortunately, it was not to be.  \n2. Property Language in the Sale of Goods Act  \nYock Lin continued his interest in personal property after our inaugural offering of the course. Indeed, never one to do things by halves, he wrote a whole book on the subject.1 One difficult issue within personal property is the language of the statute which codified the common law of sale, the Sale of Goods Act 1893, re-enacted in 1979 in both the United Kingdom2 and Singapore.  \n1 Tan Yock Lin, Personal Property Law (Academy Publishing 2014) .  \n2 The Act applies to England and Wales and to Scotland. Although the Sale of Goods Act 1893 was originally drafted only for England and Wales, there was pressure from Scotch lawyers to have it apply north of the border, and it was redrafted to include Scotland. Its purpose was therefore both to codify the common law and to introduce a uniform  \nTitle Talk 119  \nBroadly speaking, a purchaser of goods is interested in two things: the condition of the goods (fitness for purpose, merchantable quality, and so on) and the property rights they will receive with respect to them. The language of the Act3 is notoriously difficult with respect to the latter, with its various usages of the words ‘Property’, ‘Title’, and ‘Owner’. The first question is what exactly they mean.  \nA. Property  \nThe Act contains a number of references to ‘property’. Thus, section 2(1) defines a contract of sale of goods as one where ‘the seller transfers or agrees to transfer the property in goods to the buyer for a money consideration, called the price.’Other references include section 17(1), which provides that, in a contract for the sale of specific or ascertained goods,‘the property in them’ is transferred to the buyer at such time as the parties to the contract intend, and section 18, which lays down default rules for ascertaining the intention of the parties as to the time at which ‘the property in the goods is to pass to the buyer’.4  \nIn speaking of ‘property’ in the goods, the legislation rightly distinguishes between the physical goods themselves and ‘the property’ in them. It is an unfortunate shorthand to speak simply of buying and selling goods. No selfrespecting land lawyer would ever talk of buying and selling ‘land’, but of fee simple estates or leases. It should be no different with personal property, where, for instance, we are familiar with sale agreements under which the seller retains their ‘property’ in the goods until paid, so-called ‘Retention of Title’ or Romalpa clauses.5 It would be impossible to have a sensible discussion of such things without distinguishing between the physical thing itself, the goods, and the property rights with respect to that physical thing which are retained, the physical thing of course now being in the hands of the buyer.6  \nlaw of sale for England and Scotland. The story of its enactment is beautifully told by Alan Rodger in ‘The Codification of Commercial Law in Victorian Britain’ (1982) 80 Proceedings of the British Academy 149.  \n3 References hereafter to ‘the Act’ are to the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (UK) .  \n4 The language of ‘property’ also appears, inter alia, in s 16 (property cannot pass unless and until goods are ascertained),","cbCainPD7vcADKgz","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCainPD7vcADKgz","pdf",120280,17,"English","# 1. Introduction\n# 2. Property Language in the Sale of Goods Act\n## A. Property\n## B. Title","[{\"question\":\"What is the chapter’s main focus?\",\"answer\":\"It examines how the Sale of Goods Act uses the terms “Property” and “Title” and why their meanings affect purchasers’ rights in contracts for the sale of goods.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the chapter distinguish “property” from the physical goods?\",\"answer\":\"It explains that the legislation differentiates the goods themselves from the property rights in those goods, which matter for sale agreements and doctrines like retention of title.\"},{\"question\":\"What legal principle related to title does the chapter introduce?\",\"answer\":\"It cites nemo dat quod non habet, stating that when someone sells goods without being the owner and without authority or consent, the buyer acquires no better title than the seller had.\"}]","Chapter 6 - Title Talk | PDF",1789646102,26]