Although Jasmine Bhasin usually rode the bus to work, a one-day transit strike required her to drive instead. Not surprisingly, she was unable to find a parking space when she arrived at her office tower. She therefore simply parked in front of a fire hydrant and hoped for the best. At the end of the day, she was disappointed, but not particularly surprised, to find that her car had been towed away. After a few phone calls, she determined that her vehicle was being held in a compound that belonged to Buster's Towing Service. She went to the compound, paid the towing charge, and collected her car. As she approached the exit gate, she rolled down her window and expressed her displeasure to the attendant-in rather colourful and abusive language. The attendant tried to close the gate to prevent Jasmine from leaving, but he was too late. Jasmine slipped past him without difficulty. She thought nothing more of the incident until the police appeared at her office the next day and charged her with a crime. In the criminal case that followed, the attendant accused Jasmine of trying to run him over after collecting her car from Buster's compound. The judge rejected that evidence, however, and found that the attendant had concocted the whole story out of anger. Jasmine was therefore acquitted on all charges. She now believes that she should be entitled to sue the attendant in tort. Is she correct? Explain your answer.