Clayton v Le Roy [1911] 2 KB 1031 (CA)

Facts

  • Clayton gave a gold watch to Le Roy for repair.
  • Upon completion of the repairs, Clayton demanded the return of the watch.
  • Le Roy refused to return the watch, asserting a lien for unpaid repair costs.
  • Clayton disputed the existence of any agreed lien or obligation to pay the additional costs and contended the refusal was wrongful.

Issues

  1. Whether Le Roy’s refusal to return the watch constituted the tort of conversion or was merely a breach of the bailment agreement.
  2. Whether Le Roy’s claim of a lien over the watch for unpaid repair costs was valid under the principles of bailment.
  3. Whether a bailee’s refusal to return goods, based on a genuine belief in a right to retain them, amounts to conversion.

Decision

  • The Court of Appeal held that Le Roy’s refusal to return the watch did not constitute conversion.
  • The court found that a bailee who retains goods based on a genuine claim of right, such as a lien, does not commit conversion unless the claim is wholly unfounded or asserted in bad faith.
  • The court determined that Le Roy’s belief in his right to retain the watch was sincere even if ultimately incorrect.
  • The standard for conversion was clarified: an intentional exercise of authority over goods, inconsistent with the owner’s rights, is required.

Legal Principles

  • Bailment involves the transfer of possession of goods to a bailee, who must take reasonable care and is obliged to return the goods on demand absent lawful justification.
  • Conversion is an intentional act dealing with goods in a manner inconsistent with the owner’s rights and depriving the owner of their property.
  • A refusal to return goods does not necessarily amount to conversion unless it is accompanied by an intentional exercise of authority that conflicts with the owner’s rights, particularly if any claim of right is unfounded or made in bad faith.
  • Genuine claims of lien by a bailee, asserted in good faith, protect against automatic liability for conversion.

Conclusion

Clayton v Le Roy [1911] 2 KB 1031 (CA) established that a bailee’s bona fide retention of goods under a genuine, albeit mistaken, claim of lien does not by itself amount to conversion. The case provided important clarification on the distinction between wrongful refusal to return goods and actionable conversion within bailment relationships.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal