How do you prove false imprisonment

It guides users through the process of enforcing a warrant of control obtained from the County Court as a method of enforcing a money judgment; whereby the judgment creditor takes. Skip to main content. Sign in Contact us. Legal Guidance. Appeal and judicial review.

Bribery, corruption, sanctions and export controls. Consumer protection and cartels. Cybercrime and data protection offences. Extradition and mutual legal assistance. Financial services and pensions offences. Fraud, forgery, tax and theft offences. Health and safety and corporate manslaughter offences. Insolvency offences and Companies Act offences. Local Authority prosecutions. Non-business related crime. Drug offences. Offences against the person and property.

Road traffic offences. Sexual offences. Sign-in Help. To secure monetary compensation for false imprisonment, you must be able to prove that another reasonable person would not have performed the same actions in the same situation.

Your attorney will also need to demonstrate the following elements:. Eyewitness accounts of the detention may be utilized to strengthen your claim, in addition to evidence that documents your losses and suffering.

A successful lawsuit can net compensation for:. Our firm has a proven reputation as distinguished litigators in matters involving civil rights and can help you pursue just compensation for the damages you incurred. Even if probable cause exists, malicious intent will not support a claim. Sometimes imprisonment can be justified on the basis that the defendant was acting in support of the law.

The blame for the legal justification lies on the defendant. There are main remedies for false imprisonment, which can be classified as follows:. Damages in false imprisonment are those that flow from detention. A person injured by conduct, either knowingly or negligently, is entitled to compensatory damages and has no duty to lessen the gravity of such damages. There is no legal rule for the assessment of damages and it is left entirely to the court.

The basis of the damage includes injury and physical pain to the person, mental suffering and humiliation, loss of time earnings and interruptions in occupations, decrease in medical expenses, injury to reputation, etc. The arresting officer is liable for the loss of time caused by the false arrest for the time that the officer produced the person before the judicial officer and is not liable thereafter.

False arrest damages should only be measured up to the time of indictment. However, where a continuity exists between an unlawful arrest and subsequent discharge of the accused, as a continuing unlawful act, the defendant is liable for all consequences resulting from the false arrest. The general rule in an individual personal tort action is that the plaintiff is entitled to recover an amount that would be just and equitable, justifying an award for exemplary damages in the absence of circumstances.

Mere unlawful detention constitutes the basis for the recovery of at least nominal damages, but an award of nominal damages only may be insufficient and flawed where the facts have proved that the right to greater damages.

It is now held that the person can now be imprisoned without knowing it. In such cases the plaintiff can receive only nominal damages. Mental suffering including fear, shame and hatred of arrogance and humiliation, which results in wrongful detention, is generally considered an injury that can be compensated for an action of false arrest or false imprisonment.

If an imprisonment is recklessly affected, extortion, dishonour, libel and malicious manner, the jury may go beyond the compensation rule and cause exemplary and punitive damages to the defendant as punishment. Punitive damages are being awarded in cases where the conduct of defendant is grossly indifferent to the rights of others or knowingly or reasonably violates those rights, and such damages are awarded to a deterrent.

Exemplary damage may be provided in certain circumstances when power is misused by the state. Courts have often held that malice in the action of false imprisonment or false arrest will result in an award for exemplary or punitive damages.

Punitive or exemplary damages will not be allowed where false imprisonment was brought in utmost good faith, without malice in law and where there is no element of oppression. This writ is considered an effective remedy for immediate release from wrongful detention, whether in jail or in private custody by English law.

It deals with cases of false arrest or prolonged detention by police officers. Subject to the rules laid down by the High Courts, a person may be imprisoned for or by any person on his behalf.. The right of habeas corpus is an effective means of immediate release from unlawful detention, whether in prison or private custody. Where an unlawful detention continues the plaintiff may seek this writ.

This writ is also used in criminal cases of false imprisonment. The decision will be that either the prisoner will be released or if the detention is proved than he will be produced before the court for a trial. A person who has been detained unlawfully may use self-help to flee with reasonable force to protect himself from unlawful arrest.

The force used must be proportional to the conditions. When a defendant commits the tort of false imprisonment willfully or maliciously, the damages from the claim may not be discharged in bankruptcy. The most important element of a false imprisonment claim is detention. To prove detention the plaintiff needs to show two things. Second, the plaintiff needs to prove that they were detained. Although this seems simple enough, sometimes plaintiffs cannot prove they were detained.

Courts found that plaintiffs were not detained when they voluntarily went to the police station to for questioning, and when they voluntarily went with a police officer for a ride-along to see a fight.

Courts also agree that being ticketed for traffic or parking violations does not establish the element of detention.

If a jury sustains a verdict against an officer, the officer may also need to pay damages directly from their assets, savings, and potentially from their future wages. False arrest and false imprisonment claims are profoundly serious and can have life altering consequences for plaintiffs and defendants.