Saad v Volvo Finance Australia Pty Ltd

The appeal concerned a dispute over four commercial trucks and their trailers, which were the subject of a finance agreement between the respondent, Volvo Finance Australia Pty Ltd, and an operating company that had since been placed into liquidation. The respondent claimed possession of the vehicles, alleging they had been wrongfully detained by the appellant. The vehicles had disappeared from the operating company's premises and were later discovered in a secluded location. The central question was whether the appellant had exercised possession, control, or dominion over these vehicles.

The court was required to determine whether the primary judge erred in finding that the appellant had been in possession or control of the vehicles. This involved assessing the appellant's challenge to the primary judge's findings of fact, particularly concerning the credibility of witnesses. The court also had to consider the weight to be given to admissions made by the appellant against their interest, including evidence derived from aerial photography that located the vehicles together, and the appellant's admission of control over one vehicle, coupled with an offer to deliver all five vehicles for a fee or to purchase them.

The Court of Appeal upheld the primary judge's findings, concluding that there was no basis to interfere with the adverse credibility findings made against the appellant. The court found that the appellant's admissions, the circumstances of the vehicles' discovery, and the appellant's conduct in offering to return or purchase the vehicles collectively demonstrated sufficient possession, control, or dominion to establish liability for detinue and conversion. The legal principles applied focused on the elements of these torts and the standard of appellate review for findings of fact and credibility.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.