Bailment- fixed term conversion

[Lawstudent103]

Please help me so I have a problem.
There has been a bailment for a fixed term. Thus, the plaintiff has a right to future possession. However before the term of the bailment was completed the item was given away.
In order to be successful for a claim in conversion the plaintiff must have been in possession at the time of the original unauthorised act, or have had a right to immediate possession. As the term of the bailment has now ended the plaintiff has a right to immediate possession but at the time he didn't. Does conversion apply here or does there have to be a right to immediate possession at the time of the unauthorised act?

 

[Rod]

or a claim in conversion the plaintiff must have been in possession at the time of the original unauthorised act, or have had a right to immediate possession.

This statement is wrong by being incomplete and is probably why you are confused. See KUWAIT AIRWAYS CORPORATION V IRAQI AIRWAYS COMPANY AND OTHERS (NOS 4 AND 5): HL 16 MAY 2002 at [39].

Look closer at the rights of the owner.

Also note that it is a tort of strict liability.

 

[Martis]

Ooo “Bailment – Fixed Term Conversion” 😅📜 classic property + contract law spaghetti – duties, delivery probs, and termination tangles all over lol ⚖️📚 love unpackin these doctrinal + practical brain gymnastics. If ur into bailment mashups & lowkey dreamin bout research/teaching in law someday, defs peek at AcademicJobs.com — heaps of opps for law nerds, property geeks, and all-round academic hustlers 😎🤓 friendly plug but totally legit!