when is it OK to physically restrain a member of the public

[likeitorlumpit]

I've been away for a few days and am glad to see we all have these issues- wasn't it obvious I guess.

I'd like to take time to sieve through all the responses and thank you all for your input. From a glance through it would seem there are as many opinions as answers and it may not be possible to get a definitive answer. That was likely.

I do wish there was a legal section on arbtalk that gave black and white answers to these common issues - how about it Steve?

This last answer seems the usual way with arb though how it would be tested in the courts should the third lad have kicked off is where the debate becomes serious.

[Steve Bullman]

I've been away for a few days and am glad to see we all have these issues- wasn't it obvious I guess.

I'd like to take time to sieve through all the responses and thank you all for your input. From a glance through it would seem there are as many opinions as answers and it may not be possible to get a definitive answer. That was likely.

I do wish there was a legal section on arbtalk that gave black and white answers to these common issues - how about it Steve?

This last answer seems the usual way with arb though how it would be tested in the courts should the third lad have kicked off is where the debate becomes serious.

 

Not really sure thats in our remit to provide 'black and white' answers on these things, because even black and white answers are open to interpretation, likely leaving arbtalk liable.

[mike83]

explore arb i love it mate. that is the way. works for me on most people even the local yobs. On point with the mikey dread ref.. boom.

 

[Paul Cleaver]

shouting at the top of my voice at people works 99.9% of the time tho:thumbup:

 

had a Chinese bloke once - he was the 0.1% - stu pi irriot

[felixthelogchopper]

I've been away for a few days and am glad to see we all have these issues- wasn't it obvious I guess.

I'd like to take time to sieve through all the responses and thank you all for your input. From a glance through it would seem there are as many opinions as answers and it may not be possible to get a definitive answer. That was likely.

I do wish there was a legal section on arbtalk that gave black and white answers to these common issues - how about it Steve?

This last answer seems the usual way with arb though how it would be tested in the courts should the third lad have kicked off is where the debate becomes serious.

 

It's not always black and white in UK law anyway, more down to powers of argument and basically finding(and, if necessary, gently bending) a precedent that supports your point of view better than the other side has done. If there was such a section on here, a big chunk of it would have to be caveats that it was for discussion purposes only and not to be relied on as 'gospel'.

[likeitorlumpit]

It's not always black and white in UK law anyway, more down to powers of argument and basically finding(and, if necessary, gently bending) a precedent that supports your point of view better than the other side has done. If there was such a section on here, a big chunk of it would have to be caveats that it was for discussion purposes only and not to be relied on as 'gospel'.

 

OK- that makes total sense

My question now is. Do you know of any precedents in this field?

Maybe a precedent that supported someone who saved a life/saved serious injury by physical restraint though that restrained person sustained some injury.

It would be good if we could all feel able to use minimal physical restraint without too much come back. Having said that, not to use it unless absolutely necessary.

From where I'm coming from, I would expect, should we be involved in a case like this, the member of staff, possibly his/her workmates on site and definately the directors of the company would all be sued in court by no win/ no fee guys. Thats where I come in and I need to be giving the correct instruction to my staff to deal with these cases (incredibly rare I know but it does happen)

The best advice so far is the 'killing with kindness' approach. I too find this works incredibly well. Just a smile and a 'sorry but can you just wait a short while' does work in 99.9% of cases. It's just when the situation escalates that we need an easily understood policy.

So..... anyone know any legal precedents? Has anyone on here been in that position?

[felixthelogchopper]

OK- that makes total sense

My question now is. Do you know of any precedents in this field?

Maybe a precedent that supported someone who saved a life/saved serious injury by physical restraint though that restrained person sustained some injury.

It would be good if we could all feel able to use minimal physical restraint without too much come back. Having said that, not to use it unless absolutely necessary.

From where I'm coming from, I would expect, should we be involved in a case like this, the member of staff, possibly his/her workmates on site and definately the directors of the company would all be sued in court by no win/ no fee guys. Thats where I come in and I need to be giving the correct instruction to my staff to deal with these cases (incredibly rare I know but it does happen)

The best advice so far is the 'killing with kindness' approach. I too find this works incredibly well. Just a smile and a 'sorry but can you just wait a short while' does work in 99.9% of cases. It's just when the situation escalates that we need an easily understood policy.

So..... anyone know any legal precedents? Has anyone on here been in that position?

 

What you are talking about is the defence of 'necessity', the leading precedent of which is F v West Berkshire Health Authority, in particular the reasoning of Lord Goff. Although on the surface the case seems to have no connection with what we are discussing, it establishes the precedent of the defence itself. You would need to show that there was no option other than the unwarranted laying on of hands to prevent the harm. In other words, if you manhandle the person because they are holding you up and you want to get the job done, rather than they are in imminent danger, then you have no defence. Them being thoroughly obnoxious and stupid is not, unfortunately, breaking any laws and they are not at that precise moment in any danger unless your subsequent actions, eg starting/continuing the cut or dropping timber which could be held for the time it took them to travel through the drop zone, puts them there. If, however, you have to physically stop them from entering the drop zone when there is wood on the way down (and no way of stopping it ie by not pushing it off in the 1st place) then you can legitimately say that you did what you did to prevent them from harm. You can be certain that your system of work will be closely examined to make sure that the situation could not have been avoided any other way, including better planning beforehand. Your actions will need to be seen to be an absolute last resort when all of your well laid plans were overridden by something which could not be anticipated.

[treeman]

We do a lot of local authority work and come across this all the time, from all walks of life. Verbal advise and stopping operations is the only way to go. Safe work method is the ONLY work method. Imo

[felixthelogchopper]

We do a lot of local authority work and come across this all the time, from all walks of life. Verbal advise and stopping operations is the only way to go. Safe work method is the ONLY work method. Imo

 

Spot on.

[treeman]

You can be certain that your system of work will be closely examined to make sure that the situation could not have been avoided any other way, including better planning beforehand. Your actions will need to be seen to be an absolute last resort when all of your well laid plans were overridden by something which could not be anticipated.

 

That's it better planning! Less busy time of day, more ground staff.Let's face it, it's not very often people sneak up on you or into your work area, you normally see them coming are able to stop cutting/climbing and let them past, as annoying as it is!