What Is the Difference Between Conversion and Trespass to Chattels?
Standfirst:
This post is part of the Brieflex Torts Deep Dive series — where we break down the intentional torts every law student and bar taker must master. After exploring Battery and Assault — contact vs. apprehension and Intentional Torts — precision, volition, and control, we turn to property-based torts: Conversion and Trespass to Chattels. These two sound similar but differ in degree — one is minor interference, the other total dominion.
The Core Difference: Degree of Interference
The difference between Conversion and Trespass to Chattels comes down to how seriously the defendant interferes with another’s possessory rights in personal property.
- Trespass to Chattels = temporary or minor interference.
- Conversion = serious or permanent interference — so severe it’s treated as a forced sale.
Both protect personal property (chattels) — not land. The question is how much control the defendant exercised and how much harm it caused.
Trespass to Chattels
Rule: Trespass to chattels is the intentional interference with another’s possessory interest in personal property, causing dispossession, impairment, or loss of use.
Elements:
- Intentional act by D.
- Interference with P’s right of possession.
- Actual harm — dispossession or damage.
Examples:
- D grabs P’s laptop and throws it across the room — it’s scratched but still usable.
- D takes P’s phone for a few hours and returns it later.
In both, P can recover for repair costs or loss of use. The key: temporary interference or partial damage.
Exam Tip: No nominal damages — actual harm or dispossession is required.
Conversion
Rule: Conversion is the intentional exercise of dominion or control over another’s chattel that seriously interferes with their right to possess it, justifying full payment of its value.
Elements:
- Intentional act by D.
- Serious interference with P’s right of possession.
- Remedy: P can recover the full value of the property (forced sale).
Examples:
- D steals P’s car and sells it.
- D intentionally destroys P’s laptop.
- D refuses to return borrowed property.
The interference is so substantial that it’s as if the defendant took ownership.
Exam Tip: Conversion = total loss of control. Even temporary possession can qualify if D’s conduct shows dominion (e.g., using or selling the chattel as one’s own).
How to Distinguish Them
Trespass to Chattels is minor interference.
Conversion is major interference.
Ask:
- Was the owner completely deprived of their property?
- Did the defendant intend to assert ownership or destroy it?
- How long was the interference?
If the interference seriously impairs value or control, it’s conversion.
If it’s temporary or minor, it’s trespass to chattels.
Think of it this way:
- Trespass to Chattels = “borrowing or damaging.”
- Conversion = “taking or destroying.”
Transferred Intent
Intent transfers between the traditional intentional torts: battery, assault, false imprisonment, trespass to land, and trespass to chattels.
That means if D intends to interfere with one item and affects another, the intent still attaches.
However, Conversion doesn’t use transferred intent in the same way — because it’s defined by the degree of interference, not just the mental state.
Remedies
Trespass to Chattels:
- Compensation for repair costs or loss of use.
Conversion:
- Recovery of the full market value of the item at the time of conversion.
- The law treats it as if D “bought” the property from P.
Exam Tip: Always state that Conversion is treated as a forced sale — this phrase signals to graders that you understand the remedy distinction.
The Hypo
D takes P’s camera without permission to use it for a weekend trip. D returns it unharmed on Monday, but P missed a paid job because they didn’t have it.
Result: Trespass to Chattels — interference with possession, actual harm (lost use), but not total deprivation.
Now suppose D accidentally drops the camera into a lake.
Result: Conversion — total loss of property = full market value owed.
Defenses
The usual intentional tort defenses apply:
- Consent: If P allowed use of the item, no tort.
- Necessity: May justify temporary use (e.g., taking another’s property to avoid harm).
- Privilege: Some legal authority (e.g., repossession under lawful claim) can excuse interference.
Pro Tips
- On exams, always discuss both if the facts are ambiguous — graders expect it.
- If damage is total or property is sold → Conversion.
- If property is borrowed, touched, or temporarily impaired → Trespass to Chattels.
- Include remedy distinctions: repair vs. full value.
- No nominal damages for trespass to chattels — actual loss required.
Quick Text Recap
Trespass to Chattels:
- Intentional interference with personal property.
- Minor or temporary interference.
- Actual harm required.
- Remedy: repair or loss-of-use damages.
Conversion:
- Intentional dominion or control over personal property.
- Major interference or total deprivation.
- Remedy: full market value of property.
FAQ
1. Can a mistake excuse conversion?
No. Even if D mistakenly believes the item is theirs, intent to act over the property is enough.
2. Can trespass to chattels occur without damage?
No — must show actual harm or dispossession.
3. What if D returns the item?
Returning it may limit damages but doesn’t erase liability if interference occurred.
4. Is there transferred intent between conversion and trespass to chattels?
Intent can transfer within the traditional five intentional torts, but conversion depends on the seriousness of interference, not the target.
5. What’s the key phrase for Conversion on exams?
“Serious interference amounting to a forced sale.” Use it every time.
