Perry v British Railways Board [1980] 1 WLR 1375

Facts

• Mr. Perry left luggage in a locker operated by the British Railways Board.
• Upon return, he found the locker had been forcibly opened and his belongings removed and held by the defendant.
• Mr. Perry demanded the return of his goods, which was refused by the defendant citing unpaid storage fees.
• Mr. Perry initiated legal proceedings seeking return of his property and damages for wrongful detention.
• The defendant asserted it was entitled to retain the goods as security for the fees owed.
• Initial lower court decisions favored the defendant, but on appeal, a higher court found the refusal to return the goods unjustified and awarded specific restitution to Mr. Perry.

Issues

1. Whether Mr. Perry demonstrated ownership or a superior right to possession of the detained goods.
2. Whether the British Railways Board's actions amounted to a wrongful detention, amounting to the tort of conversion.
3. Whether the defendant was entitled to assert a valid lien as legal justification for retaining the goods.
4. What remedy—specific restitution or damages—was appropriate in the circumstances.

Decision

• The court held that Mr. Perry had established a right to possession of the goods.
• The British Railways Board’s refusal to return the goods was unjustified, constituting wrongful detention.
• The defendant’s claim to a lien lacked a valid legal or contractual basis.
• Specific restitution was granted as the appropriate remedy due to the unique and irreplaceable nature of the goods.

Legal Principles

• The tort of conversion applies to wrongful detention of goods where the defendant’s control is inconsistent with the claimant’s rights.
• Claimants bear the burden to prove ownership or a superior right to possession on the balance of probabilities.
• A lien permitting detention of goods requires explicit statutory or contractual support.
• Specific restitution is an equitable remedy, awarded at the court’s discretion, especially where goods are unique, and return is feasible.

Conclusion

Perry v British Railways Board [1980] 1 WLR 1375 establishes clear requirements for recovery of wrongfully detained goods, underscoring the necessity of proving a right to possession, the need for a legitimate legal basis to retain goods, and the availability of specific restitution as an equitable remedy in suitable cases.