BUS115 week 3 discussion

For this week’s discussion post, you will be examining the topic of intentional torts. For this discussion post, please address the below scenario and determine if there is a cause of action. An activist group is protesting a company’s safety practices. They decide to lawfully protest outside the building and the management instructs their security personnel to surround them until the police arrive. The protestors feel threatned by the guards and tries to disperse back to their corporate headquarters, but they could not get around the security guards. The police arrived and after their investigation, they let the protestors leave without arrest. The group decides to bring a lawsuit against the company for false imprisonment.

Answer:

In the scenario described, the activists may have a valid cause of action for false imprisonment against the company. False imprisonment occurs when someone intentionally restricts another person’s freedom of movement without lawful justification. In this case, the management instructed security personnel to surround the protestors, effectively preventing them from dispersing and leaving the area.

While the protestors were lawfully protesting outside the building, the actions of the security personnel in surrounding them and restricting their movement could be considered an intentional act to confine them against their will. The protestors’ attempts to disperse back to their corporate headquarters were thwarted by the security guards, indicating that their freedom of movement was indeed restricted.

Although the police ultimately arrived and allowed the protestors to leave without arrest, this does not negate the fact that they were unlawfully confined by the company’s security personnel prior to the police intervention. Therefore, based on the elements of false imprisonment, the activists may have grounds to bring a lawsuit against the company for their actions.