What is the test for a false imprisonment claim?

The gist of the action of false imprisonment is the mere imprisonment. The plaintiff need not prove that the imprisonment was unlawful or malicious but establishes a prima facie case if he proves that he was imprisoned by the defendant. The onus then lies on the defendant of proving a justification, 3rd Halsbury, Volume 38, page 765, quoted by Cartwright, J., in Fvey v. Fedoruk, 1950 CanLII 24 (SCC), [1950] S.C.R. 517, at 523. Inasmuch as the authority for the arrest is provided by section 5 (supra) and the arrest is proved the remaining issue between the parties is whether or not the defendants had reasonable and probable cause. Counsel are in agreement that the test that I should apply is that which has developed through a long line of cases and that is this: it is sufficient if the apparent facts would cause a reasonable suspicion in the mind of a reasonable man. Once this reasonable suspicion is present the defence is established.