How does a defendant's good faith relate to the seriousness of interference for conversion?

In the context of conversion, the seriousness of interference with another person's property is determined by the nature of the defendant's actions and not necessarily by their state of mind or intentions. When assessing conversion, the focus is on whether the defendant's conduct deprived the owner of their property in a serious way, which generally involves an unauthorized exercise of control over the property.

The fundamental principle here is that good faith—defined as the honest belief that one's actions are justified—does not alter the fact that the defendant unlawfully interfered with the rights of the property owner. Even if a defendant genuinely believes they have the right to use or possess the property, if their interference meets the legal standards for conversion, they can still be held liable.

Thus, the seriousness of the interference is independent of the defendant's belief or intentions. This underscores the notion in tort law that the protection of property rights is paramount, and the legal consequences of conversion apply regardless of whether the defendant acted sincerely or mistakenly.