Was the assignment of Mr Greaves rights under the CGU policy effective at law?
The trustee’s case on appeal was that he had acquired legal title to the chose in action while the deed of arrangement remained on foot, and accordingly had the right to sue CGU in his own name. CGU contended that the assignment of the chose in action was not effective at law. CGU argued that Mr Greaves retained a residual beneficial interest in the rights under the policy since the trustee could decide, under the terms of the deed, not to pursue a claim under the policy. In that event, there would be a resulting trust to the assignor (Mr Greaves), who would be able to enforce the rights against CGU. CGU submitted that, because Mr Greaves had not assigned the whole of his beneficial interest in the chose in action to the trustee, there had been no “absolute assignment” as required by section 12 of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) for a legal assignment of a chose in action. The Court of Appeal considered, by reference to authority, the meaning of an “absolute assignment”. Sackville AJA
