ABSTRACT
However, in practice a right of action against B may be worthless, so that the party left to seek recompense from B may himself have to bear the loss. Thus, the right to the goods may be of vital importance, and will usually be determined through the tort action for wrongful interference with goods.1A will argue that, as B had no title, he could pass none to C: this is known as the nemo dat rule (see para 19.11). C will argue that by way of one of the exceptions to that rule he has obtained a better title than B or A (see para 21.02). The burden of proof on the plaintiff/claimant to identify the disputed property should not be underestimated, few types of goods apart from motor vehicles being readily identifiable.3
