Help Sandra Ezquerra get this piece of artwork back

[Richard]

Also your first paragraph is wrong too.

Actually I'm being unfair: you may be thinking of the abolition of the "sale in market overt" rule by the Sale of Goods (Amendment) Act 1994, which depending on how the art was sold could indeed be relevant. We don't know enough about how he got it.

[BPP]

1) nothing in your hypothesis of a gift clashes with what I have said, if they gifted the piece back to the Ezquerra there is no question as to title. But that is not what is widely considered to have happened here where people are assuming it’s like the Bolland.

2) my first paragraph is correct.

[Richard]

Chitty on Contracts says different.

[Proudhuff]

Its like Crown Court in here, where's that Nicholas Ball?*






*Oldies cultural ref

[Proudhuff]

Its telling that I immediately could think of a couple of names about who the likely "owner" is who is unwilling to return the art.

FWIW, I'm told it's most definitely not the most obvious suspect.

He didn't mean you DDD! relax

cheap shot Jim.

[judgeurko]

what a horrible person, just give it back stop being a c**t!