Lecture 2B Interference Goods PDF

Session 2023/2024 Intentional Tort: B. INTERFERENCE WITH GOODS Lecturer: AP Dr Nadhratul Wardah Salman Faculty of Law, University of Malaya 1 Interference with exclusive use of a person’s personal property. Exam...

Session 2023/2024 Intentional Tort: B. INTERFERENCE WITH GOODS Lecturer: AP Dr Nadhratul Wardah Salman Faculty of Law, University of Malaya 1 Interference with exclusive use of a person’s personal property. Examples of personal property? 2  The principles of trespass which apply with respect to land can also apply with respect to any form of property which can give rise to possessory rights.  Goods or animals are the obvious example, but a person can also commit trespass with respect to a cheque, a bill of exchange, a debenture note or a share certificate.  Say a person takes a cheque that is written out by you in favour of someone else. You could say that the cheque had been stolen but this would be a criminal law concept. As you will recall many torts are also potential criminal offences. Trespass to personal property is close to the criminal offence of stealing. 3 3 types: 1. Trespass to Goods Pencerobohan terhadap hartabenda 2. Conversion Salah milik 3. Detinue Salah simpan 4  Trespass, meaning interference, is one of the oldest areas of tort. Trespass to goods developed alongside trespass to land and to person and was similar but it protects personal property. 5  Definition A wrongful and direct interference with goods that are in the possession of another (Norchaya, 2010). Plaintiff’s interest to continue to have physical possession of his property – deprive the use of property as well as to maintain and protect his right to the– non – interference of his property. 6  Trespass to goods includes using, removing, touching or destroying another’s goods. Taking someone’s book without his consent Running a key/coin alongside an individual’s car scratching the paint work Wheel clamping can be a trespass unless the plaintiff voluntarily undertook the risk of the clamping  Reminder: Never touch or use or interfere with the goods of another person, be it a friend or otherwise, without prior consent, otherwise you may be sued under trespass to goods 7  Trespass to goods is usually available with respect to cases where there has been no substantial damage or injury to personal property.  Taking (or touching!) someone’s goods without the person’s consent and without any other legal justification for removal of it constitutes the tort of trespass.  It might be what many would, call stealing but that is a criminal concept.  In torts it is called trespass to goods. 8  The person who is in actual possession prior to the trespass is the person who can sue for trespass to goods. ▪ A person who has possession of goods- physical control ▪ Ownership is not necessary ▪ Exception to possession – can claim without having possession of goods: i. A Trustee acting for a beneficiary ii. An Executor or Administrator of an estate iii. A person with franchise 9 2 elements: 1. Mental state of the defendant 2. Interference 10  1. Mental state of the defendant  must prove that defendant had intended to deal with the goods. National Coal Board v Evans 2 Wilson v Lombank 1 WLR 1294 11 2. Interference  Direct act of Defendant and contact with the Plaintiff’s goods  Physical interference and voluntarily done by the Defendant. 12 2. Interference  Direct act of Defendant and contact with the Plaintiff’s goods  Physical interference and voluntarily done by the Defendant. Kirk v Gregory 1 Ex. D 55 Haji Awalludin bin Anidin v Majlis Perbandaran Kuantan 13  An act of denying the Plaintiff’s right to immediate use and possession -Taking over another’s property - Exercising ownership rights over it  The Plaintiff can only claim the value of the goods and not the goods themselves. The amount of damages will be assessed on the value of the goods and upon the Defendant’s payment, ownership will pass to the Defendant. 14 Examples of conversion:  Detaining goods belonging to the Plaintiff without permission after a demand for the goods which has been refused.  Destruction of goods belonging to the Plaintiff  Selling goods without the Plaintiff’s permission 15 2 elements: 1. Mental state of the defendant 2. Interference 16 1. Mental state of the defendant  Deliberate and intentional act  Voluntary act by the Defendant  Exclude Plaintiff from use of possession of goods  No knowledge that goods belong to another is no excuse Ashby v Tolhurst Lewis Trust v Bambers Stores 17 2. Interference  Defendant is unlawfully taking possession of another’s property and converting into his own use. Examples:  Defendant took your book and then changed the cover and kept it.  Defendant’s borrows Plaintiff’s book promising to return soon but continues to keep it and underlines/draws pictures and refuses to return it to the Plaintiff - abusing posession. Fouldes v Willoughby (1841) 18  2 circumstances: (a) Voluntary reception (b) Involuntary reception  If a person receives goods voluntarily when in fact the goods belong to a third party who does not consent to the handling of the goods, the party who receives them may be liable in conversion. Ingram v Little Morris v CW Martin & Sons Ltd Sykt Jengka Sdn Bhd v Abdul Rashid Harun [1981} 19  Involuntary Reception of Goods Lethbridge v Phillips Howard v Harris Hollins v Fowler 20  A person entitle to possession of the goods  The law allows claims by a person who had a right to immediate possession as well as to a person who enjoyed actual possession at the time the conversion was committed.  The Pf must prove that he had possession of the goods or the right to immediate possession of them at the time of the wrongful act. 21  Damages/Compensation obtainable for conversion based on recovery of the market value of the goods and special damages. This extinguishes the Plaintiff’s title.  Alternatively, Plaintiff can have the goods to be restored plus special damages. 22 WHAT IS DETINUE? 23  ‘detenue’ (French) = ‘to hold back’.  Unlawful retention of someone’s else goods  Wrongful retention of Plaintiff’s goods or refusal to return goods to the Plaintiff who has the right of immediate possession, and the Plaintiff wants the goods to be returned.  Must be established that the Plaintiff is entitled to immediate possession and that a specific demand was made for its return and that the Defendant unreasonably refused to accede to that request. 24  The tort of detinue involves interests in individual property and may be used to protect viable interests in goods. It is a legal action where the plaintiff having an absolute right in goods, seeks to recover it from another who is in actual possession and refuses to redeliver them.  Detinue can be distinguished from trespass from the fact that in a case of detinue the defendant is in actual possession of the goods while trespass can be committed to the goods, which are in possession of the plaintiff. 25  Detinue is concerned with wrongful withholding of goods.  The elements of the tort are that the plaintiff with a right to immediate possession is faced with a defendant who is wrongfully withholding.  Actionable per se – no proof of actual damage is necessary 26 1. Demand and refusal 2. Immediate right to possession 27 1. Demand and refusal  The Defendant must continue to keep the property even after the Plaintiff demanded for its return Meaning: Pf must have demanded for the return of goods Df must have refused to return the goods Abdul Mutalib bin Hassan v Maimoon Haji Abdul Wahid 1 CLJ 88 Nambiar v Chin Kim Fong MLJ 60 28 2. (Plaintiff has the) Immediate right to possession  I lent my book to Danial for an agreed term of 1 months on the basis that he paid me RM2.00 per week.  Danial now has the immediate right to possession of the book for 4 weeks.  If Elsa took the book from Danial, Elsa might be sued for detinue. This right is given to him because there is an interference with his immediate right of possession.  If I (as the true owner) took the book without Danial’s consent during the stated period, I might as well be liable in detinue. This is because, at that time, I did not have the immediate right to possession even as the owner. The arrangement has been created whereby I have given that right to Danial. 29  2. (Plaintiff) Immediate right to possession Sajan Singh v Sardara Ali MLJ 52 Although the contract might be illegal, it was fully executed and carried out and it was effective to pass property in the lorry to the Pf. Court held the right to immediate possession and his claim in detinue succeeded. Goh Hock Guan & Associates v Kanzen Bhd Only the owner of the passport can make a claim for the wrongful retention, and not the representative. Puspakom Sdn Bhd v Strateq Data Centre Sdn Bhd Defendant was liable because Plaintiff had the immediate right to possession. 30 The amount of damages is the value of the goods at the date of judgement and any damages in respect of the wrongful detention between the date of the refusal and the date of the actual return. 31  A person who finds an object has a good title except against: The true owner The occupier of the land where the object is found When the object is underneath the land or attached to the land Where the occupier of the premises where the object is found has intention to control the area and everything that is in the area. Case: Parker v British Airways Board 1 All ER 834 32 33 The lecturer can be contacted at: [email protected] 34