The Claimant alleged against Harrods Limited the tort of conversion in accordance with s.2(2) of the Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977. The claim relates to certain personal items (principally jewellery) which she inherited and which for many years remained in a safe deposit box on the Defendant’s premises.
Held: On the facts, Eady J concluded that the letter relied on as the relevant demand was not a demand at all, both because it was not an unequivocal request for return of the property and because the request was not ‘ . . specific as to the property being sought. It was not, for example, possible at that stage even to define the items compendiously, by reference to the ‘the contents of the box’, since they had been removed and mixed with other property more than three years before’
The Honourable Mr Justice Eady
[2008] EWHC 521 (QB)
Bailii
Torts (Interference with Goods) Act 1977
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis v Meekey Admn 12-Jan-2021
The claimant had been convicted and served his time for possession of a large collection of obsolete or antique firearms. He now sought their return. The police replied that he was in any event out of time.
Held: ‘Section 3(2) of the 1980 Act . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Torts – Other, Limitation
Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.266529
