In tort video assignment,I learnt much principle of law and I know well about trespass to the person. Throughout the acting of the video, I understand about the element of tort including battery,assault and false imprisonment. With the case law provided, I can know that the liability of a person towards his/her wrongful act. I have learnt how to cooperate with my group members while presenting the video. I communicate a lot with my classmates as we can discuss about the acting part of the video. I also learnt how to combine the scene of the acting part to a video and video editing too. It is a great experience and this will help me to prepare myself for future career purpose. I become more self-independent while given the task that perform my job individually and have higher self-confidence while I can project the elements of tort for example as a defence I kicked one of my group members.

1. In our video presentation, I am the innocent victim. I am false imprisonmentby
my group mates. According to Steele, false imprisonmentis an unlawfuland
total physicalrestraintof the liberty of the claimant. Elements of false
imprisonmentare mental element which comes fromintention and nature of
restraintwhich mustbe total restraint. Falseimprisonmentcan come in many
forms, including any threat or use of authority that confines you against your
will. While physicalforceis often used, it is not required. Moreover, the
restraintof a person may be imposed by physicalbarriers (such as being locked
in a car) or by unreasonableduress (such as holding someone "within the
bounds of a fixed area" over a long period of time. In R v Governor of Brockhill
Prison(2000) 4 ALL ER 15,the prison Governor was liable in damages for false
imprisonment. As the detention for those additional days that Ms Evans being
false imprisoned were unlawful, even though the Governor could not have
been aware of the new guidelines at that time. Unlawful, or false,
imprisonmentconsists in such confinement or detention withoutsufficient
authority. Furthermore, the nature of restraintunder element of tort of false
imprisonmentis the restraintmust be total which means that it is a situation
that is entirely impeding their freedom of movement. In Birdv Jones (1845) 7
QB 742, a public right of way ran through an enclosure created by the
defendants for the purposeof viewing a boat race. The plaintiff in an attempt
to use the rightof way entered the enclosure. The defendants prevented the
plaintiff from walking through the enclosure and instead instructed him to run
back and reach the destination through someother route. The plaintiff refused
to move and stayed in the enclosurefor half an hour. The plaintiff sued the
defendants claiming that they had committed falseimprisonment. The claim
was rejected : the defendant had done nothing that completely restricted the
plaintiffs freedomof movement. The plaintiff had been free to leave the
enclosureand find any different route for getting to the place he wanted to.
HOL held that the defendant was notheld liable for committed false
imprisonment. This is simply becauseif there is an alternative route and that
must be reasonablethe defendant held not liable for falseimprisonment.
Patteson J has commend on it that imprisonmentis , as he apprehend , a total
restraintof the liberty of the person, for however shorta time, and not a
partial obstruction of his will, whatever inconvenience it may bring on him. In
Malaysian case, Abdul Malek binHusinv Borhan bin Hj Daud [2008]1 MLJ
368 ,the plaintiff arrested without a warrantof arrestby a group of special
branch officers. He was never told reason for arrest. Plaintiff physically abused
while in detention. Never told the reasons for arrestexcept detention under
ISA. Thedefendant has been Detained for 57 days. The courtheld that the
detention unlawfuland amounted to false imprisonment. In Malaysian Law,

2. Article 5(1) of the Federal Constitution provides that no person may be
deprived of his personalliberty savein accordancewith the law.Article 5(3)
provides that wherea person is arrested, he shall be informed as soon as may
be of the grounds of his arrestand be allowed to consultand be defended by a
legal practitioner of his choice. In our video presentation, my team mates were
broughtme to the hidden room and preventing me fromusing alternative to
escape. The restraintare total. And the intention are clear, when I first
rejecting the estacy pill that forcely given by them, they have intended to
detain me and try to apply the tort of assaultand battery towards me. They
tied me up, they using apprehensiveto warn me, they punched me and they
even restrict my way to escape. This is clear evidence that they havebeen
falsely imprisonment without any authority.
However,I can only raiseself-defense. Self defense will be a justification to an
action in battery if the force used is reasonableand is proportionateto the
threat. Proportionality is central to the defenses of assaultand battery. In
defense of of one’s self, of another person, an actor may use force
proportionateto
The interest the actor is protecting
The injury or harmthreatened by the other – a general approach to this issue
firstrequires establishing how much forcemay be used and then deciding
whether the actual force used was greater than the allowable maximum.
In Cockroft v Smith(1705) , the plaintiff, Cockroft, who was clerk of the court,
ran his forefinger towards Smith’s eye during a scufflein court. Smith bit off
Cockroft’s finger during the incident and the question was whether in these
circumstances self-defensewas a proper defense. Itwas held that a person
may usereasonableforce in self –defense and Smith could not justify biting off
Cockroft’s finger.
Holt LJ said :
…hitting a man a little blow with a little stick on the shoulder, is not a reason
for him to draw a sword and cut and hew the other…
Forcemay be used defensively under Criminal Law Act 1967 ; s 3 provides that
:
A person may use such force as is reasonablein the circumstances in the
prevention of crime..

3. Although the defense is available to one who goes to assistanother under
attack, self-defensefailed in the case of soldiers taking part in United Notions
peacekeeping operations in Kosovo who werenot being threatened with being
shotwhen find their guns.
In our video, one of my team mate try to tie me up, in that situation, my eye
are covered by the cloth and I am unable to see anything. When she trying to
tie me up, I apply the force toward her by kicking her. The issueis whether the
forceapply is proportionate. The only defense should be raise as a self
defense. I should have free fromthe liability of battery . As my legs are tied up,
will my forcebeing applied are maximum, is that enough to proportionatethe
forcethat another party apply? The answer is No. And the other issueis they
are still carrying the weapon for example the metal stick which may contribute
a greater force.