| what is trover/conversion? | an intentional tort where someone passes on the bailor's property without permission or legal right |
| true or false: delivery must take place for conversion to take place | true, property usually passes with delivery and so if delivery does not occur, there is no need for conversion
> Lancashire Wagon v Fitzhugh |
| what happened in Hollins v Fowler? did conversion occur? | yes, cotton was fraudulently obtained by the wrong person, then sold and delivered to a third, who had no knowledge of the fraud but was nevertheless liable in trover |
| how are goods recovered in conversion when they are destroyed? | as to the owner's wishes
upon the circumstances
if some of the goods have been turned into something else, the bailor may have a proprietary claim. if its all, then it belongs to the bailor |
| what does Jones v de Marchant establish? | a husband had, over time, given his wife some 18 beaver pelts with a view to them eventually being made into a fur coat. They were kept in cold storage until that time should come. However, at some point, the husband decided instead to have them made into a coat for his mistress. Four extra pelts had to be purchased to complete the coat, but it was mainly made out of the furs that he had given to his wife. the wife was determined to be the owner. |
| what did the Indian Oil Corp v Greenstone Shipping 'The Ypatianna' establish? | that where goods are combined in a way that it is inseparable, for example oil, the quantity is jointly owned by different owners depending on how much they purchased/owned of the quantity |
| what is demand and refusal? the leading case? | if a bailor demands return of goods and the bailee refuses, that is actionable as a breach of contract
> Howard E Perry v British Railways Board - plaintiffs were steel stockholders and stored them with the defendants. a strike of steelworkers meant no steel would be moved and the Board agreed/supported the workers. it was held that due to the Board refusing the bailor to see their property, this would be an action in conversion |
| what is statutory conversion? | where goods have been destroyed or lost due to negligence than deliberate acts, it is a statutory conversion |
| what is the leading case for a right to immediate possession? | The Anderson Group Pty Ltd v. Tynan Motors Ltd - the appellant took a car under purchase hire and wanted to sell it on. The agreement contained a provision that the hirer was not to part with possession without prior written consent. The appellant claimed that it telephoned Esanda, obtained a payout figure, informed Esanda that they intended to sell the vehicle and then took it to the yard of the bailee, Tynan Motors Pty Limited (“the respondent”) for sale on consignment. The appellant also failed to insure the vehicle which was a breach of the agreement. thieves then took the keys to the car and the vehicle was never seen again. Esanda then gave a notice of repossession demanding that the appellant hand over possession of the vehicle.
it establishes the immediate right to possession the bailor has. |
| what did Calor Gas Ltd v Homebase establish? | the terms of the contract need not expressly entitle a bailor to possession in order for the bailor to gain an immediate right to possession |
| what does Stocznia Gdanska SA v. Latvian Shipping Co establish? | it was held that generally speaking the common law right of termination of bailment would not be ousted by a contractual term without the strongest justification. |
| conditions for damages: | Damages are compensatory in nature.
Causation must be proved.
Losses must not be too remote.
Losses should be mitigated.
Contributory negligence applies to negligence cases and to contract where liability is the same as in negligence, but not to conversion |
