What is the defence of a defendant landlord in conversion?

The defendant landlord in Robertson v. Stang defeated the plaintiff’s claim in conversion on what appears to have been a “mere conduit” defence. The key passage from the decision in the latter regard appears in para. 52: “… there is no evidence suggesting that the defendants moved the plaintiff’s goods with the intention of claiming title to them, or of depriving her of title. There can therefore be no conversion. The defendants’ purpose in moving the goods out of the apartment was not to claim them for their own; it was to eliminate a fire hazard and to enable them to measure the plaintiff’s apartment for the purposes of converting the building to a strata corporation.”