Victim of false imprisonment wins personal injury claim

The Client was falsely accused of shoplifting at a Marks & Spencer store. She was held against her will, deprived of contacting relatives and/or a legal representative and interrogated for up to half an hour before the mistake was realized.

Liability was contested throughout but settlement achieved of £40,000.00.

A personal injury lawyer handling this case had faced several challenges, From Gathering sufficient evidence to prove that the store's actions constituted false imprisonment and/or malicious prosecution to Preparing and presenting a compelling case in court, if necessary, to achieve the best possible outcome for the client.

• Gathering sufficient evidence
• Overcoming the store's defenses
• Quantifying the client's damages
• Conflicting versions of events
• legal complexities
• Negotiating with the store's legal team

• 1. Investigation and Documentation

  The personal injury lawyer will conduct an investigation into the incident and gather all relevant evidence, including witness statements, security footage, and any other relevant documentation.

• 2. Evaluation and Assessment

  The lawyer will assess the evidence and determine the legal basis for the client's claims of false imprisonment and/or malicious prosecution.

• 3. Representation and Negotiations

  The lawyer will represent the client in negotiations with the store's legal team and insurance company, working to secure a fair settlement that compensates the client for their damages.

• 4. Litigation

  If a settlement cannot be reached, the lawyer may file a lawsuit and represent the client in court proceedings. The lawyer will present the client's case and evidence, cross-examine witnesses, and argue for the best possible outcome for the client. If necessary, the lawyer will also be prepared to appeal the case if the initial ruling is not in the client's favor.

Hence Proved, The Client was falsely accused of shoplifting at a Marks & Spencer store. She was held against her will, deprived of contacting relatives and/or a legal representative and interrogated for up to half an hour before the mistake was realized. Liability was contested throughout but settlement achieved of £40,000.00.