FXS (Through His Father And Litigation Friend JLM) v Mulberry Bush Organisation Ltd [2026] EWCA Civ 415 (01 April 2026)

FXS (Through His Father And Litigation Friend JLM) v Mulberry Bush Organisation Ltd [2026] EWCA Civ 415 (01 April 2026)

The face down restraints constituted battery as they were contrary to school policy, not justified as emergency interventions, and performed without appropriate training. The towel method amounted to false imprisonment as it was a planned physical intervention restricting liberty without lawful authority or compliance with required procedures. Hostile intent is not an ingredient of battery; the key issue is intentional, non-consensual application of force or restraint without lawful excuse.

Citation
[2026] EWCA Civ 415
Parties
Claimant/respondent: FXS (through his father and litigation friend JLM); Defendant/appellant: Mulberry Bush Organisation Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 April 2026
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; findings of battery and false imprisonment upheld; awards of aggravated and compensatory damages affirmed.
Legal Topics
Battery, False Imprisonment, Use of Force in Schools, Restraint of Children, Damages, Statutory Interpretation
Tort Law Education Law Child Law Battery False Imprisonment Use of Force in Schools Restraint of Children Damages +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

FXS (through his father and litigation friend JLM)

Claimant/respondent

Mulberry Bush Organisation Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the use of face down restraint on a child at a special school constituted battery
  2. 2 Whether the use of the 'towel method' to prevent a child leaving his room constituted false imprisonment
  3. 3 Whether the actions were justified under statutory or common law authority

Ratio Decidendi

The face down restraints constituted battery as they were contrary to school policy, not justified as emergency interventions, and performed without appropriate training. The towel method amounted to false imprisonment as it was a planned physical intervention restricting liberty without lawful authority or compliance with required procedures. Hostile intent is not an ingredient of battery; the key issue is intentional, non-consensual application of force or restraint without lawful excuse.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; findings of battery and false imprisonment upheld; awards of aggravated and compensatory damages affirmed.

Orders

  • Defendant’s appeal on liability and aggravated damages dismissed
  • Compensatory and aggravated damages to claimant affirmed