Talk:Chose

Law Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merge

It has been three weeks with no comments or edits, so I will complete the requested merger. Jlittlet 18:54, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jurisdictional Bias

While a chose in action does refer to a right to sue it is not inaccrutate to refer to shares, bank accounts, and some types of trusts as a chose in action in Australia. The writer is obviously referring to his own jurusidction. In other jurisdictions, such as Australia, the High Court has always referred to intangible property as choses in action. A right to sue is considered to be just one type of a chose in action. I would be interested to know if the author was referring to a US or UK jurisdiction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.222.156.110 (talk) 05:07, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe, in English and Commonwealth systems, a "chose in action" refers to both the right to sue, as well as a form of intangible property. As far as intangible property is concerned, choses in action include things like property in shares, bank deposits, and book debts. As far as the right to sue is concerned, the way to enforce property rights against such intangible property IS by suing. Hence, both definitions are correct and in fact comport to the idea of what a "chose in action" is. Just that the reader/writer must take care to note the context in which the phrase is used.