Sayers v Harlow Council – The claimant became locked in a lavatory due to a lock breaking on the door. This was not false imprisonment as there was no intent, and it is common knowledge that if you go into a public toilet you will get stuck/ catch herpes/ die of general horror. Thing to ponder: Is putting someone in a coma false imprisonment?, Sayers v Harlow Urban DC [1958] 1 WLR 623; [1958] 2 All ER 342; (1958) 122 JP 351; (1958) 102 SJ 419. NEGLIGENCE, CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE, PERSONAL INJURY, REMOTENESS OF DAMAGE, BREACH OF DUTY OF CARE, LOCAL AUTHORITIES DUTIES, PUBLIC LAVATORY, FAULT IN LOCK. Facts. The plaintiff visited a public lavatory, owned by the defendant – a local …
Sayers v Harlow Urban District Council if there is an ‘escape-route’, it will still be false imprisonment if the escape-route is not a reasonable one. (C) was locked in a lavatory the court felt that a potentially dangerous climb over the door, or through a window, was not a reasonably safe escape-route.
Sayers v. Harlow 1958 Urban District Council. A woman tried to escape out of a toilet, but when she tried to get out through the window, she fell down. No false imprisonment. The escape was dangerous, it was not intentional. Sunbolf v. Alford 1838 . Customers refused to pay. The boss of the restaurant locked them, thus preventing them from leaving.
Sayers v Harlow UDC (1958) Facts : Plaintiff became imprisoned inside the defendants’ toilet because of the negligent maintenance of the door lock by the defendants’ servant. In trying to climb out of the toilet she fell and was injured.
False imprisonment . 1. False imprisonment is the act of unlawfully restricting the physical freedom of another. … Details a) A false arrest will suffice even if it is made merely under threats or persuasion, or deception, without physical force, for the movements of the person will then be under control of the tortfeasor. … Sayers v . Harlow …
Where this happens, the claimant’s damages are reduced by the percentage to which the claimant is held to be at fault. The leading case here is Sayers v Harlow UDC (1958) where the claimant was trapped in a public toilet due to a defective lock. She was injured when trying to climb out and it was held that she had contributed to her own injuries.
Sayers v Harlow UDC While no intention on the behalf of D is needed in a claim of false imprisonment, the imprisonment must be caused by a deliberate act [direct]. (Mrs Sayers was injured trying to climb out of a lavatory owned by Harlow UDC.
2/12/1975 · prerequisite for a cause of action in false imprisonment both correct and desirable? 2 Rogers, Winfield and Jolowicz on Tort, llth ed.
p. 56, n. 46a suggests that deprivation of one’s liberty for a substantial period is in itself damage and cites Sayers v . Harlow U.D.C. [1958] 1 W.L.R. 623 as authority. The case is no, Herd v Weardale steel, coal and coke co – no false imprisonment for keeping workers from leaving shift early Miners already down a mine at start of shift decided work was too dangerous.
