||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 20 (Jan)
||Adrian Jack (instructed by Sibley & Co) for the claimants.
||Robert Lamb (instructed by Stonehams, Saffron, Walden) for the defendant.
||11 January 2002
Lien - Motor vehicle - Mechanics lien - Claimants owning racing cars - Defendant agreeing to carry out work on cars in return for payment - Claimants not making full payment to defendant - Defendant claiming entitlement to lien in respect of cars until outstanding balance paid - Claimants making application for delivery up of cars - Whether delivery up should be ordered.
Where a party was entitled to a particular lien in respect of goods as having performed work on them, that lien was not lost by a temporary loss of possession in circumstances where there was an intention for the lien to continue. In the instant case, the temporary loss of possession of the cars due to the race at Silverstone was not sufficient for the defendant to lose the lien. Accordingly the arrangement between the parties had created a lien, and due to the doctrine of estoppel by convention, the claimants were prevented from going back on the arrangement with the defendant.
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary