【Case Study】

Winkworth v.Christie,Manson & Woods Ltd.[1980] 1 All E.R.1121

P owned works of art which were stolen from him in England.They were taken to Italy and sold to X,who was unaware that they were stolen.X sent them to D Co.auctioneers,in England,to sell on his behalf.P brought proceedings against D Co.and X for detinue and conversion.X claimed that under the lex situs rule,the validity of the transfer of movable property was governed by the law of the country where the goods were situated,and Italian law should apply to decide the question of ownership as between X and P.P argued that there had been no disposition from P to X,that because the case had so close a connection with England,English law should be treated as the lex situs,and that an exception should be made to the lex situs rule on the grounds of public policy where property was stolen.(https://www.daowen.com)

The court held that there was no exception to the lex situs rule in these circumstances,and there was a binding disposition according to the lex situs,which was therefore binding everywhere,and the court would not introduce a wholly fictional English situs merely because there were a number of English connecting factors.

Hence,if personal property is disposed of in a manner binding according to the lex situs,the disposition is binding everywhere,even though the goods are stolen and removed from one country,dealt with in another country and then returned to the first country.