B.C. Appeal Court orders re-trial after trial judge misapplies conversion of stolen property law in “chop shop” case

Finding that a trial judge misapplied the law related to the conversion of stolen vehicles, the B.C. Court of Appeal has ordered a re-trial in a case involving a man accused of allowing his motor vehicle dealership to be used as a vehicle “chop shop.”
The Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (ICBC) was successful in claiming for damages for fraud, conspiracy and conversion of stolen vehicles insured by ICBC against seven defendants, including Jozef Suska, who was found liable for fraud and conversion of 15 vehicles in a staged accident fraud.
The fraud involved stolen vehicles in B.C. that were registered through a Yukon motor vehicle dealer and then shipped from B.C. to Ontario.
ICBC went after the Yukon vehicle dealer, claiming he was engaged in a joint business enterprise with Suska. ICBC claimed the Yukon vehicle dealer’s name, properties and facilities were used to facilitate the conversion of the stolen vehicles.
The trial judge threw out ICBC’s claim against the Yukon vehicle dealer. The trial judge found not enough evidence existed to permit an inference that the Yukon dealer knew about or participated in the conversion activities that occurred on his properties.
But the Appeal Court found the trial judge had conflated the proof required for conspiracy – which requires proof of knowledge or intent – and conversion, which is a strict liability tort.
In other words, to prove conversion, the Yukon dealer’s “liability would not depend upon his knowledge that the vehicles were stolen,” the Appeal Court ruled.
The Appeal Court ordered a new trial for the Yukon vehicle dealer.