In article .com "Dave" writes:
John Boyle wrote:
....
Quite. the point about bank notes is covered quite explicitly in Miller
v Race in which a bank refused to honour one of its notes that had been
stolen and had subsequently found its way to the plaintiff who acquired
it quite legitimately and in good faith. It was held that the bank was
still liable to the plaintiff on the note.

Thank you for your informative post. This leads onto a couple of
issues, the first of which may be worthy of a top level post in
uk.legal.
What about other countries in Europe do they all apply the same ruling?
i.e. harmonization of case law across the EU. This may be especially
relevant if the UK starts using the Euro.

I know that in the Netherlands, when you come in possession of stolen goods
and can show good faith, that you are the legitimate owner of the article,
irrespective of the article, so it can be a banknote. Just about a year
back in Amsterdam there was a similar case. A woman was found in
possession of a bicycle that had been reported as stolen. She was able
to show (convincing enough) that they had not bought the bicycle from a
junk for a low price, but that she had bought it as a second-hand
bicycle in a bicycle-shop. So she was legitimate owner of it, because
buying in a shop is considered to be in good faith.

But, on the other hand, there is nearly no harmonisation of case law
across the EU. In the Netherlands it is based on common law that
basically derives from the Code Napoleon.
--
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/