conversion

Conversion is an intentional tort to personal property which involves the defendant’s unjustified wilful interference with the chattel deprives plaintiff of possession of such chattel. The plaintiff must have actual possession or an immediate right to possession at the time of the wrong. Absolute ownership is not necessary to establish standing to bring action. Inference in conversion means the exercise of dominion over another’s chattel. Conversion is unlawful interference without lawful justification with any chattel in a manner inconsistent with the right of another thereby depriving that other person of the right of the use of the chattel.

Both tangible items and intangible property can be the subject of a claim for conversion. Stealing something from someone else is one form of conversion. However, conversion is not limited to theft as conversion can also be accomplished by moving, transferring, discarding, hiding, vandalizing, or destroying another person’s chattel.

An action for conversion is usually in the form of asking damages equal to the fair market value of the chattel at the time of conversion. While the defendant can offer to return possession of the chattel to the plaintiff, there is no obligation on the plaintiff to accept it in settlement of his claim.

Sale by a receiver in defiance of an injunction is conversion. This is so because the goods have been dealt with a manner that is inconsistent with the owner’s title. 7up Bottling Co. Ltd. & Ors. v. Abiola & Sons Bottling Co. Ltd. (2001) FWLR (Pt. 70) 1611.

The usual method of proving adverse possession is by showing the neglect or refusal of the defendant to comply with the plaintiff’s demand for return of the chattel.

The following are the persons that can sue under the tort of conversion:

• a. Owners.
• b. Buyers.
• c. Bailees
• d. Holders of lien or pledge.
• e. Assignees.
• f. Finders.
• g. Trustees.

The following are the defenses available to a defendant in an action for conversion:

• a. Temporary retention of the goods to take steps to verify the title of the plaintiff.
• b. Subsisting lien.
• c. Subsisting bailment.
• d. The title or better title of a third party known as jus tertii.
• e. Limitation of time.

The rules regarding the finding of lost property are as follows:

• a. A person who finds a chattel acquires no rights over it, save it has been abandoned, or lost, and he takes it into his care and control. He acquires a right to keep it against all persons, except the true owner; or a person who can assert a prior right to keep the chattel, which was subsisting at the time when the finder took the chattel into his care and control.
• b. Any servant, or agent who finds a lost property in the course his employment, does so on behalf of his employer, who by law acquires the rights of a finder.
• c. An occupier of land or a building has superior rights to those of a finder, over property or goods in, or attached to the land, or building. Elwes v Briggs Gas (1886) 33 Ch D 562.
• d. An occupier of premises does not have superior rights to those of a finder in respect of goods found on or in the premises, except before the finding, the occupier has manifested an intention to exercise control over the premises, and things on it.

The remedies available to a plaintiff in an action for conversion are the following:

• a. Order for restitution, delivery or return of the chattel to the plaintiff.
• b. An order for payment of any consequential damage.
• c. Recovery of special or general damages.
• d. Alternative order for the payment of the market value of the chattel.

Jus tertii is the title or better right of a third party to the chattel, goods, or property in dispute. As a general rule, a defendant cannot plead that a plaintiff is not entitled to possession as against him, because a third party is the true owner of the chattel. A defendant can only plead jus tertii when he is defending on behalf of, or on the authority of the true owner.