It's the stores duty to train their security guards correctly, so therefore they can be held liable.
If the OP thinks the police are going to rush in and make an arrest I think he is gravely mistaken.
Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk
| law-index
| Acts
| Members Image galleries
Spankymonkey wrote:It's the stores duty to train their security guards correctly, so therefore they can be held liable.
Spankymonkey wrote:If the OP thinks the police are going to rush in and make an arrest I think he is gravely mistaken.
As far as the police are concerned, I would guess that you probably do not have a crime number, but rather an incident number which merely records your complaint. If it's a crime number then there is some small chance that the police might have to do something about it and that is not usually viewed by them as a good thing.
dls wrote:The levels of damages suggested might be a little old. Such awards can be difficult to trace, but see for example Elosta v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis and Others [2014] 1 WLR 239, where a wrongful detention of 45 minutes was counted only in nominal damages in the absence of evidence of particular loss.
Don't damages tend to be significantly lower in judicial review cases than that of civil cases?
dls wrote:The current discussion has no relevance that I can see to judicial review.
Spankymonkey wrote:dls wrote:The current discussion has no relevance that I can see to judicial review.
Then why did you refer to a judicial review judgement?
shootist wrote:Spankymonkey wrote:dls wrote:The current discussion has no relevance that I can see to judicial review.
Then why did you refer to a judicial review judgement?
I can see no reference by DLS to JR anywhere on this thread. Maybe another, different, thread?
Return to Torts - Negligence, Defamation and others
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest