BeatlesGear Discovers Lennon's Long Lost 1962 Gibson J160E

[iiipopes]

Folks, the issue is much more complicated, since there are several countries involved, and each country has its own laws, and each is different as to how they regard each other country's laws, and between the time it was stolen and last year, there are even more laws to apply with the EU. This subject is not going to get hashed out here in a forum. Just so all of you know, the average personal property course in an American law school is a semester of sixteen weeks, three hours a week, to learn both the basic and the finer points, and even then, there are many inconsistencies as to how to characterize the elements of ownership as opposed to the elements of possession. Then you have to consider how to characterize the property as lost, stolen, mislaid, forgotten, treasure trove, etc. Then there is the question as to any other laws influencing subsequent transactions, including elements of knowledge, value exchanged, etc., to get to the mindset of the parties. Issues of bailment must be determined, if any. Finally, there is the issue of time, not just any limitations on when a person can bring an action, but also if someone has died along the way, as in this situation, do any heirs or representatives still retain any hereditary rights, again, with each place's laws being different. I would say that the saga of this guitar, with facts thrown in, would make a good three-hour law school essay question. And even then, the best a student would be able to do is point out the issues involved, not get to any "answer" as to who should have the guitar.

I would surmise that if the reporting about the JL estate receiving some of the proceeds is true, it was probably a settlement to avoid further litigation.

The only thing that is for sure is that the phrase, "possession is nine tenths of the law" does NOT mean the person possessing an item of personal property has any superior rights in relation to whomever an analysis of the law determines is the "true owner." Quite the contrary. A person who merely possesses an item of personal property is usually the least entitled to it, depending on all the issues set forth above. What this phrase means is that traditionally, newly called solicitors in the UK were set to drafting paperwork in their respective firms, so that the work of drafting deeds, wills, contracts, etc., in other words, working on issues of ownership and possession, occupied nine tenths of a young lawyer's working time.

Yes, I was a pupil to a barrister in the summer of 1985.