Originally Posted by
Icarus2001
....
Try leaving a multi story car park without paying, the boom gate stays down. Wheel clamping comes to mind? Refusing to pay at a bar, security guard "restrains" you until police arrive, same at a supermarket etc etc
Still a really bad look.
There is no longer a general right to detain to enforce payment of a civil debt unless the right is conferred by statute.
Although people can consent to their freedom of movement being limited by entering premises or public or commercial transport, that does not mean they are consenting to have their freedom of movement blocked as a consequence of a stoush about money between two companies. If I’d been a passenger or crew on the aircraft, I’d take action for false imprisonment against whoever decided to park the truck to stop the aircraft moving. You don’t even have to have known why the aircraft wasn’t moving at the time.
I consent to remaining stationary on the tarmac if the crew or ATC have decided that the weather is such as to make it safer to depart after a 30 minute delay. I do not consent to remaining stationary on the tarmac as a pawn in an argument about money between two companies.
Speaking of guards and supermarkets, in this case a suspected shoplifter was found to have been falsely imprisoned by security guards and police who took up a formation to ‘guide’ the suspect to the store security room:
Myer Stores Ltd v Soo [1991] VicRp 97; [1991] 2 VR 597 (13 November 1990)
The difference with car park booms and wheel clamping is that the person is not imprisoned. The person can walk away.
There is this quaint concept - generally ignored by greedy millionaires - that personal liberty is more important than the payment of a debt. There are ways to get debts paid without interfering with someone’s freedom of movement.