Yes, the implication would be from the two examples that some damage to the good or chattel would be the basis for the action of the tort, when in fact, merely denying the rights of the person or party with the greater claim to title (who may not actually have to absolutely prove his title) is a perfect ground for action.
The question is: When does a conversion become an appropriation under the Theft Act 1968; or a fraud by false pretences under the Fraud Act 2006. I will take the example out and replace it with something more typical. I will think about it today and try to come up with something. A E Francis (talk) 15:50, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi AE Francis,
It is a noble act to give your time in writing these articles. They are very helpful to litigants in person such as myself.
Here is an example for you which is the example from my case.
A lends B catering equipment for new business. Catering equipment can be shown to be property of A. B's idea is to set up business, sell business and retrospectively buy equipment from A at a good premium on completion of any sale. But business falls into arrears of rent and lease is determined by landlords. Landlords (who have prior knowledge of title to equipment) insist on retaining the equipment by exercising a lien, with a view to selling the equipment to cover some of their losses. Upon refusing and persistently refusing to restore the chattels to the rightful owner or the party with the greatest right to immediate possession of the goods, even if they were mistaken in their belief that the goods were the property of B, they have committed the tort of conversion and will be liable for damages.
Have just read your revision and it is much better than the previous introduction.
Dear Sampson: Feel free to put your ideas into the article, if you wish. It would be good if you could cite a reference or a case number. Just type in using the reference method: just cite references like they are in article. Thanks for the compliment. Actually, I learn a lot more by writing these articles than I give. So I am the one reaping the benefits. By writing you force yourself to learn. A E Francis (talk) 20:33, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi AE Francis,
Thanks for that, I am hesitant about writing on legal issues without formal training and a lack of unencyclopaedic language! But I am definitely keeping an eye on the page relating to conversion. You are doing a great job! That new edit is vastly superior to the book scribbling example. I will keep open mind about developing article. ALl very best and happy xmas! Samson