possessory rights. A destruction or loss of chattels occurring as a result of the Defendant's negligence or passivity is not actionable as a conversion. The Defendant's conduct must demonstrate a dominion over the chattels. Not only must the defendant's act he a positive one, but the conversion must have been intended. It is not sufficient if the loss or destruction resulted from mere carelessness.
100 READ: KODILINYE, G., pp. 195-205: (a) Conversion by Taking: Fouldes V. Willoughby (1841) 151 ER 1153; Bushel V. Miller (1718) 93 ER 428; (b) Conversion by using another's item as if your own: Petre V. Heneage (1701) 88 ER 1491; Penfolds Wines Ltd V. Elliot (1946) 74 CLR 204; Lancashire and Yorkshire Rly Co. V. McNicholl (1918) 88 LJ KB 601; (c) Conversion by Receiving: Hollins V. Fowler (1875) LR 7 HL 757, 767; (d) Conversion by Destruction, consumption or alteration: Hollins V. Fowler; Simmons V. Lillystone (1853) 155 ER 1417; (e) Conversion by Wrongful Transfer of Title Possession: Hollins V. Fowler; Parker V. Godin (1728) 93 ER 866.
