...that this would not have been the plaintiff’s intention, but that it was a reasonable belief on Colin Russell’s part at that time.

10. Colin Russell restrained the plaintiff on the ground, in a manner which was forceful, with his forearm to the throat, during a prolonged period, during which Colin Hall moved the sign to the van. At this point the restraint was excessive in manner and duration. Colin Russell, as I find, if it be relevant, was not motivated by any intention to hurt the plaintiff.

11. Colin Russell released his restraint only when instructed to do so by Christopher Hall who was directing operations. Thereafter, the plaintiff became aware that the sign was being removed and sought to recover it. The plaintiff ran towards the van, shouting words to the effect “Don’t take the sign”.

12. Colin Russell construed the plaintiff’s intentions as potentially violent towards Colin Hall at this time, and the plaintiff was undoubtedly distressed and his arms were flailing. I am not satisfied that any punch was aimed at Colin Hall at this time. The plaintiff, as I find, was concerned for his sign and not to harm Colin Hall. I am satisfied that Colin Russell forcibly restrained the plaintiff from behind by jumping and grabbing him around the neck and bringing him to the ground. This was a level of force which was unjustified and excessive in the circumstances, and caused injury to the plaintiff...