Dear Colleagues;

A very interesting decision just handed down by the Victorian Court of Appeal in Levy & Watt & Anor [2014] VSCA 60 (14 May 2014) http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/vic/VSCA/2014/60.html on conversion, limitation periods and fraud. The case involved a valuable Rupert Bunny painting which had been stolen some years ago and then found its way into possession of a solicitor, who had been given it as a bequest by a client. Once discovered the estate of the original owner sued for its recovery. The solicitor claimed that it was too late as the 6 year limitation period had expired. The key questions where whether the exceptions in the legislation relating to fraud were satisfied or not. The court agreed that an explicit exception as to “fraud” in the nature of the tort action was not satisfied, as an action for conversion does not involve an allegation of fraud. But there was another exception relating to concealment by fraud. Authorities differed as to whether this exception was applicable to the original wrongful theft, or only applied to the current owner. (There was an exception to the exception relating to purchase for value but since the solicitor had received this as a gift, and couldn’t prove whether his client had paid for it or not, that wasn’t available.)