This was an appeal on a claim of wrongful arrest and false imprisonment. The trail court in its findings held that the security officers did not first establish that the tomatoes and onions had been in fact stolen.

The appellant argued that the trail magistrate had misdirected himself in saying that the theft had to be first established before or after arrest.

It was stated that the appellants had the burden of establishing the existence of a reasonable suspicion to justify the arrest which they had failed to prove.