User talk:Qiuyan Zuo/sandbox

Reflections on Possession The 9th Law in The Sale of Goods Lead Section There are various definitions to the understanding of the concept of the 9th law of the sale of goods which can be likened to the sale of goods act of 1979. several authors have given their definitions and understanding to the concept creating a greater understanding to the same. Qiuyan Zuo (talk) 09:53, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

According to Masum & Mohiddin (2018) He illustrated repossession as an essential remedy to hire purchase transactions readily available in the hire purchase transactions. Repossession is the reacquiring of goods from a hirer by an owner of certain goods, as stated by the law. There are mechanisms put in place to ensure the validity of an owner repossessing goods that had already been issued to a hirer according to agreements that had been laid. However, the disposition of the act seems to be overprotective to the owner of the goods more rather than both parties.

According to Martin Hirschprung (2016) He argued that the broad concept of property can be directly linked to property law. This is, however, a general characterization since it is evident that various actions can be directly linked to possession can establish ownership. The understandings of the concept of ownership has grown over time, and there is a need for the possession doctrine to enable establishment of possession . It highlights the examples of possessions that were accepted in areas but rejected in others and contrasts the possession doctrine that boldly states that it influences ownership.

According to Stuart Dick (2015) He stated that possession being the ninth law in the sale of goods, is meaningless unless backed factually with supporting pieces of evidence. Titles in Scotland cannot be the full property of someone unless they spend ten years with the title they acquired without dispute. Possessory titles are issued when one has reasons for lacking original titles. It showcases that one with a better claim can come around and take land from someone with none. However, a title that has matured for twelve years or more showcases possession and can be upgraded to an absolute tittle.

According to Joseph William Singer (2006) He talked about the Sherill decision against the Cayuga Indian Nation. Thus, we might claim that former ownership and occupancy of the tribe in that land cannot be counted upon as ownership. A disturbing ruling was made against the tribe even though the case has taken a long while in litigation in the courts. In other words, to understand possession as being nine-tenths of the law of the sale of goods, we understand that the Indian nation had not sold their land but had been pushed off and had not tried to reclaim it due to lack of representation.

According to John Duncan (2007) He stated that the United States started aa a colony of small groups. The little congregation of various colonies came together to form states and, eventually, the country. The USA may later require to acquire more land outside, and this may pose a lot of questions and difficulties. However, acquisition currently differs from previous times when the military was used to subdue protectorates. This, however, clearly shows how possession does not necessarily have a direct representation of the law of sale of goods. Qiuyan Zuo (talk) 06:53, 24 November 2020 (UTC)