普通法-案例分析筆記(存儲版)
【正文】 and notable points of law:Did not constitute false imprisonment as the plaintiff could have left the area another wayMerely obstructing someone’s way is not false imprisonment if the plaintiff has another means of going out (egress)When a person is restrained, there need not be actual physical restraint, eg: an arrest, even if executed by merely touching the claimant, is a restraint as it would be if a person has the physical capatity to leave but it is unreasonable to expect him to do so.McFadzean v. Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union (2007 Australia, Supreme Court of Victoria – Court of Appeal)Fact:見PPT 75Rule: Four criteria to determine whether egress is reasonable: threat or danger to self/property (., jumping out of moving truck not reasonable, para. 58), distance and time, and legality Robinson V Balmain New Ferry Facts:The P had contracted with D to enter their wharf amp。Cole v. TurneIssue. Under what circumstances and with what mindsets may a touching constitute battery? Synopsis of Rule of Law. The lightest angry touch constitutes battery. A gentle touch made in close quarters with no ill intention is not a battery. A forceful or reckless touch, in close quarters is a battery. 即：? “the least touching of another in anger is a battery”? “if two or more meet in a narrow passage, and without any violence or design of harm, the one touches the other gently, it will be no battery”Key point the degree of contact is irrelevant: the “l(fā)east touching” is actionableBut: current rule is that battery does not require anger: ? Is an unwanted kiss battery? Yes.Shooting a person with the best of intentions? Yes.No anger, no damages, no have to be conscious at the time of the contact Collins v Wilcock [1984] 3 All ER 374FACT:A police woman took hold of a woman39。s action was therefore
環(huán)評公示相關推薦
鄂ICP備17016276號-1