Court case(1876) 1 Ex D 55

A man died in his house. While he lay dead and members of the household were present, his sister-in-law (the defendant) removed some jewellery belonging to him from the room in which he lay to a cupboard in another room, believing that it would be safer there. The jewellery was afterwards stolen from that cupboard by an unknown person. The executor of the deceased sued the defendant for trespass to the jewellery. She had acted honestly, intending only to protect the property for the estate.

The court held the defendant liable in trespass. Although she had acted in good faith and with a view to safeguarding the property, there was no imminent danger to the jewellery where it was, and her interference with it was not reasonably necessary. A person who meddles with another's goods without necessity does so at his own risk, and the defence of necessity was not available to her. The wrong lay in the unjustified removal itself, so it did not avail her that the actual loss was caused by an unknown thief.