Bird v Jones (1845)

Law of Torts · Trespass to the Person

Facts.

Part of Hammersmith Bridge was closed off with seating for spectators of a boat race. The plaintiff insisted on passing along the closed footway. Policemen prevented him from going forward, but he was at all times free to go back and cross by another route. He remained for about half an hour and then sued for false imprisonment.

Issue.

Does a partial obstruction of movement in one direction amount to false imprisonment?

Held.

No. The restraint must be total — a boundary set on every side. An obstruction that leaves the plaintiff free to go elsewhere by a reasonable route is not imprisonment, however annoying.

Why it matters.

It supplies the “total restraint” requirement and the “reasonable means of escape” rule, and it is asked directly as a short note.

📄 Full Law of Torts notes + Question Bank (₹199) — every topic in depth, model answers to all past exam questions, in one printable PDF. Get the bundle · All landmark cases · All Law of Torts topics