Trespass Tort

Trespass to the person is the direct or the threat of infliction of harm upon the claimant. There are three torts classified under the tort of trespass to person, namely, battery, assault and false imprisonment. These intentional torts are actionable per se, so that they can be used to protect one's civil rights and dignity, even if no physical injury has occurred. What actually amounts to an intention? A person is deemed to have an intention if he desires to produce the consequences of his act, and knows substantially, and certainly the potential consequences resulting from his act. For instance, A intended to throw a stone at B, and A succeeded in hitting B. So, A has intentionally caused the harm. The definition, elements, and cases under

Different cases have provided different results and reasoning based on varying facts. In an earlier case, Herring v Boyle , the school authorities refused to allow the mother to bring her child home due to unpaid school fees. It was held that there was no false imprisonment as the child was unaware of the detention. However in Meering v Grahame- White Aviation Co Ltd , the defendant was liable for false imprisonment because the fact that there were two police officers guarding outside the office where the plaintiff was in, the plaintiff’s freedom of movement was totally restrained. Although the plaintiff was unaware of the officers’ presence, if the plaintiff tries to leave the office, the police officers can stop him from doing so. The courts held that the plaintiff does not need to be aware of the imprisonment, thus overruling Herring’s case. There is an intention to commit an act to detain, knowledge of the detention is unnecessary and false imprisonment will still be established. An exception of determining false imprisonment is when the plaintiff enters the property under certain conditions. In Robinson v Balmain Ferry Co Ltd, there was no false imprisonment because the plaintiff was subjected under the ferry’s regulation that a payment must be made upon entry and exit of the ferry. Hence the grounds for detaining the plaintiff were