- 1 Marks
BCL – L1 – SA – Q17 – Tort
Question
Peter filed a lawsuit for false imprisonment against Smith’s Bookstore. During a visit to Smith’s Bookstore, Smith stopped Peter as he left the store. Smith accused Peter of stealing a book from the store. After briefly looking into Peter’s shopping bag, Smith determined that Peter did not shoplift. He apologized to Peter and released him. On these facts, Smith will likely:
A Win the case, because the shopkeepers’ privilege statute gives store merchants unconditional immunity (protection) from such lawsuits.
B Lose the case because Peter did not shoplift.
C Win the case, but only if a court or trier of fact concludes that Smith had reasonable cause to believe Peter may have shoplifted, detained him for a reasonable time, and in a reasonable manner.
D Lose the case because Smith did not have a warrant.
Answer
C
Explanation:
The shopkeepers’ privilege allows merchants to detain suspected shoplifters if they have reasonable cause, detain for a reasonable time, and act reasonably. Smith’s brief detention and apology suggest compliance, so he will likely win if these conditions are met (C). Unconditional immunity (A) is incorrect, as the privilege is conditional. Peter not shoplifting (B) alone does not ensure Smith loses, and a warrant (D) is not required.
- Tags: False Imprisonment, Reasonable Cause, Shopkeepers' Privilege
- Level: Level 1
- Topic: Tort
- Uploader: Samuel Duah