Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
3 Form of judgment where goods are detained.
(1) In proceedings for wrongful interference against a person who is in possession or in control of the goods relief may be given in accordance with this section, so far as appropriate. (2) The relief is— (a) an order for delivery of the goods, and for payment of any consequential damages, or (b) an order for delivery of the goods, but giving the defendant the alternative of paying damages by reference to the value of the goods, together in either alternative with payment of any consequential damages, or (c) damages. (3) Subject to rules of court— (a) relief shall be given under only one of paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of subsection (2), (b) relief under paragraph (a) of subsection (2) is at the discretion of the court, and the claimant may choose between the others. (4) If it is shown to the satisfaction of the court that an order under subsection (2)(a) has not been complied with, the court may— (a) revoke the order, or the relevant part of it, and (b) make an order for payment of damages by reference to the value of the goods. (5) Where an order is made under subsection (2)(b) the defendant may satisfy the order by returning the goods at any time before execution of judgment, but without prejudice to liability to pay any consequential damages. (6) An order for delivery of the goods under subsection (2)(a) or (b) may impose such conditions as may be determined by the court, or pursuant to rules of court, and in particular, where damages by reference to the value of the goods would not be the whole of the value of the goods, may require an allowance to be made by the claimant to reflect the difference. For example, a bailor’s action against the bailee may be one in which the measure of damages is not the full value of the goods, and then the court may order delivery of the goods, but require the bailor to pay the bailee a sum reflecting the difference. (7) Where under subsection (1) or subsection (2) of section 6 an allowance is to be made in respect of an improvement of the goods, and an order is made under subsection (2)(a) or (b), the court may assess the allowance to be made in respect of the improvement, and by the order require, as a condition for delivery of the goods, that allowance to be made by the claimant. (8) This section is without prejudice— (a) to the remedies afforded by section 133 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, or (b) to the remedies afforded by sections 35, 42 and 44 of the Hire-Purchase Act 1965, or to those sections of the Hire-Purchase Act (Northern Ireland) 1966 (so long as those sections respectively remain in force), or (c) to any jurisdiction to afford ancillary or incidental relief.
3 Form of judgment where goods are detained.
(1) In proceedings for wrongful interference against a person who is in possession or in control of the goods relief may be given in accordance with this section, so far as appropriate. (2) The relief is— (a) an order for delivery of the goods, and for payment of any consequential damages, or (b) an order for delivery of the goods, but giving the defendant the alternative of paying damages by reference to the value of the goods, together in either alternative with payment of any consequential damages, or (c) damages. (3) Subject to rules of court— (a) relief shall be given under only one of paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of subsection (2), (b) relief under paragraph (a) of subsection (2) is at the discretion of the court, and the claimant may choose between the others. (4) If it is shown to the satisfaction of the court that an order under subsection (2)(a) has not been complied with, the court may— (a) revoke the order, or the relevant part of it, and (b) make an order for payment of damages by reference to the value of the goods. (5) Where an order is made under subsection (2)(b) the defendant may satisfy the order by returning the goods at any time before execution of judgment, but without prejudice to liability to pay any consequential damages. (6) An order for delivery of the goods under subsection (2)(a) or (b) may impose such conditions as may be determined by the court, or pursuant to rules of court, and in particular, where damages by reference to the value of the goods would not be the whole of the value of the goods, may require an allowance to be made by the claimant to reflect the difference. For example, a bailor’s action against the bailee may be one in which the measure of damages is not the full value of the goods, and then the court may order delivery of the goods, but require the bailor to pay the bailee a sum reflecting the difference. (7) Where under subsection (1) or subsection (2) of section 6 an allowance is to be made in respect of an improvement of the goods, and an order is made under subsection (2)(a) or (b), the court may assess the allowance to be made in respect of the improvement, and by the order require, as a condition for delivery of the goods, that allowance to be made by the claimant. (8) This section is without prejudice— (a) to the remedies afforded by section 133 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, or (b) to the remedies afforded by sections 35, 42 and 44 of the Hire-Purchase Act 1965, or to those sections of the Hire-Purchase Act (Northern Ireland) 1966 (so long as those sections respectively remain in force), or (c) to any jurisdiction to afford ancillary or incidental relief.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Sign in to file itThink it through
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.