Thesis (LL.M.)--University of Hong Kong, 1998. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available in print.

published_or_final_version / Law / Master / Master of Laws

LL.M. (Civil Procedural Law) / In this dissertation various topics regarding inchoate documents will be analysed and discussed. A brief historical background will set the scene, showing the development of bills of exchange in various countries around the world. Although the origins of the earliest bills of exchange can be traced back to Arabic traders in the eighth century, the development of the bill of exchange is generally traced back to the lex mercatoria, i~ the rules which were adopted by medieval traders, especially the Lombards in Italy, to conduct their business. As the lex mercatoria was absorbed into various countries, differences developed. It is clear that the English Bills of Exchange Act 1882 had a marked influence on the law relating to negotiable instruments in most Commonwealth countries and the United States of America. In the second chapter the distinction between the common law and statute law will be analysed. The recent Appellate Division judgment in the case of Thompson v Voges 1988 (I) SA 747 (A) will be discussed. In that case Acting Chief Justice Rabie held that an automatic estoppel could not operate against the signatory of an inchoate document who had signed a document and had handed it to another with the intention that it be issued and used as a negotiable instrument. A detailed analysis of Thompson's case, and the cases referred to by the learned Acting Chief Justice in the course of his judgment, will show that the conclusion reached by him can only be applied to holders who qualify as mere holders, and not to holders in due course. It is submitted, with the greatest respect, that an automatic estoppel will still operate in favour of a holder in due course...