Conversion, Detinue, and Trespass to Chattels:

Question: Can I sue in Ontario for wrongful interference with my personal belongings if they were damaged but not taken?

Answer: If your personal items or other chattels in Ontario were directly and immediately interfered with and damaged without you losing possession, that can fit a trespass to chattels claim under the interference torts framework, which differs from conversion or detinue because the belongings remain with the rightful owner or person with rightful possession.  Ontario courts describe the test for trespass to chattels as unlawful disturbance of possession by seizure, removal, or a direct act causing damage, such as vandalism that harms goods while they stay in your control (for example, Ontario Consumers Home Services v. Enercare Inc., 2014 ONSC 4154).  In practice, you may seek actual loss like devaluation, and in appropriate cases general damages for emotional disruption or punitive damages for intentional or egregiously malicious conduct, and a paralegal at Vescio Legal Services can help you assess evidence, timelines, and potential damages based on your facts.  Call (416) 400-8255 for a free 1/4 hour consultation and next steps in your trespass to chattels matter across Ontario.

Add this website to Google Preferred Sources

Wrongful Interference With Personal Belongings

Trespass to chattels involves wrongful harm by interference with chattels, chattels being legally defined as objects unattached to land that include personal belongings such as household furnishings, artwork, clothing, appliances, among other things, as well as commercial belongings such as moveable machinery, goods for sale as inventory stock, animals as livestock, among various other objects.

The Law

Trespass to chattels is similar to conversion and detinue whereas all three relate to wrongful interference with a chattel; however, the distinguishing nuance with trespass to chattels is that the object remains in possession or control of the owner or person with rightful possession which differs from conversion and detinue where the owner or person with rightful possession is deprived of possession.  Perhaps the easiest way to explain the difference is to use the criminal law term in that conversion or detinue may arise from theft (criminal law term) of the object, being interference by removing the chattel from the possession of the rightful owner or person with right of possession and trespass to chattels may arise from vandalism (criminal law term) being interference without removal of the chattel.

The elements necessary to give rise to the tort of trespass to chattels were well articulated in Ontario Consumers Home Services v. Enercare Inc., 2014 ONSC 4154, where it was stated:

Claimable Damages

Where chattels, such as an automobile as a personal belonging, or other thing, is harmed per the law of trespass to chattels, a lawsuit may make claim for the resulting actual loss suffered, meaning the devaluation of the object as a result of the harm to the object.  Furthermore, depending on the circumstances, especially where the trespass was troublesome and emotionally disruptive, general damages may be appropriate; and additionally, where the trespass was intentional or egregiously malicious, punitive damages may be applicable.

Conclusion

The tort of trespass to chattels is found within the family of interference torts which include, among others, the torts of conversion and detinue.  The key difference with the tort of trespass to chattels and the tort of conversion or the tort of detinue, is that with trespass to chattels, the chattels, meaning goods or personal belongings, remain with the rightful owner or person with rightful possession.