Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorScott, Struan
dc.date.available2019-03-08T01:18:18Z
dc.date.copyright2016
dc.identifier.citationThe Otago Law Review 14(2) 313- 327 (2016).en_NZ
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10523/9048
dc.description.abstractThis article questions the application of the change of position defence in the context of an ultra vires transaction similar to that encountered in Sinclair v Brougham. To modern eyes, Sinclair v Brougham is a ‘bewildering’ authority but the author argues that the decision was the “just outcome” on the facts of that case and that the change of position defence has the ability to replicate the result in that case only if the application of the defence is moulded by the underlying policy considerations that made both the receipt and use of the funds ultra vires.en_NZ
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoenen_NZ
dc.publisherThe Otago Law Review Trust Boarden_NZ
dc.relation.ispartofOtago Law Reviewen_NZ
dc.subjectSinclair v Broughamen_NZ
dc.subjectProperty Lawen_NZ
dc.subjectTrust Lawen_NZ
dc.subjectUltra Vires Transactionen_NZ
dc.titleSinclair v Brougham and Change of Positionen_NZ
dc.typeJournal Articleen_NZ
dc.date.updated2019-03-07T22:19:14Z
otago.schoolUniversity of Otago Faculty of Lawen_NZ
otago.relation.issue2en_NZ
otago.relation.volume14en_NZ
otago.bitstream.endpage327en_NZ
otago.bitstream.startpage313en_NZ
otago.openaccessOpenen_NZ
 Find in your library

Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record