Appeal from dismissal of claims for unlawful imprisonment and malicious prosecution.
Dame Elizabeth Butler- Sloss P
[2004] EWCA Civ 246
England and Wales
Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.194422
The Court dismissed a challenge brought on behalf of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament to a condition imposed under section 3(3) of the 1936 Act prohibiting all processions in the Metropolitan Police District.
Times 15-May-1981
England and Wales
Cited – Jones and Others v The Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis Admn 6-Nov-2019
Distributed Demonstration not within 1986 Act
The claimants, seeking to demonstrate support for the extinction rebellion movement by demonstrating in London, now challenged an order made under the 1986 Act restricting their right to demonstrate.
Held: The XRAU was not a public assembly at . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.643852
The claimant had been the subject of a raid by armed police on his home. The raid was a mistake. He complained that the English legal system, in rejecting his claim had not allowed him to assert that the police action had been disproportionate.
Held: The claimant’s right to respect for his home had been infringed. The question was whether the raid was proportionate. To test this the claimant was required under English law to establish malice on the part of the police. That did not allow the required test: ‘The fact that the police did not act maliciously is not decisive under the Convention which is geared to protecting against abuse of power, however motivated or caused (see, mutatis mutandis, McLeod, cited above, where the police suspected a breach of the peace might occur). The Court cannot agree that a limitation of actions for damages to cases of malice is necessary to protect the police in their vital functions of investigating crime. The exercise of powers to interfere with home and private life must be confined within reasonable bounds to minimise the impact of such measures on the personal sphere of the individual guaranteed under Article 8 which is pertinent to security and well-being . . In a case where basic steps to verify the connection between the address and the offence under investigation were not effectively carried out, the resulting police action, which caused the applicants considerable fear and alarm, cannot be regarded as proportionate.
As argued by the applicants, this finding does not imply that any search, which turns out to be unsuccessful, would fail the proportionality test, only that a failure to take reasonable and available precautions may do so.’
Times 09-Aug-2006, 28867/03, [2006] ECHR 764, (2007) 44 EHRR 33
Human Rights
Appeal from – Keegan and Others v Chief Constable of Merseyside CA 3-Jul-2003
The police had information suggesting (wrongly) that a fugitive resided at an address. An armed raid followed, and the claimant occupant sought damages.
Held: The tort of malicious procurement of a search warrant required it to be established . .
Cited – Olsson v Sweden (No 1) ECHR 24-Mar-1988
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Violation of Art. 8; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award – domestic proceedings; Costs . .
Cited – McLeod v The United Kingdom ECHR 23-Sep-1998
A Police Officer assisting in recovery of items ordered to be returned in matrimonial proceedings acted in excess of his powers and trespassed in entering house where there was no immediate threat of breach of the peace, and no sight of disorder. An . .
Cited – Costello-Roberts v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Mar-1993
‘Slippering’, a punishment by hitting a child with a slipper, when used as part of school discipline was not a degrading punishment under the convention. Conduct must attain a minimum level of severity to engage the operation of the Convention. . .
Cited – Funke v France ECHR 25-Feb-1993
M. Funke successfully challenged his conviction for failing to provide documents which the customs authorities had demanded of him, on the grounds that his rights under Article 6 had been infringed: ‘The Court notes that the customs secured Mr. . .
Cited – Boyle and Rice v The United Kingdom ECHR 27-Apr-1988
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings
The first applicant had been convicted and sentenced for murder and subsequent acts of . .
Cited – Vilvarajah and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 30-Oct-1991
Five Tamils were refused asylum in the UK and returned to Sri Lanka but then continued to suffer ill-treatment. Their complaints to Strasbourg were rejected under both Articles 3 and 13, but with regard to Article 3, it held: ‘108. The court’s . .
Cited – Olsson v Sweden (No 2) ECHR 27-Nov-1992
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Lack of jurisdiction; No violation of Art. 6-1; No violation of Art. 8; Violation of Art. 8; Violation of Art. 6-1 (access); No separate issue under Art. 53; . .
Principle judgment – Keegan v United Kingdom ECHR 3-Dec-2009
Case closed. . .
Cited – Williams v Dyfed and Powys Police CA 22-Nov-2010
The claimants appealed against dismissal of their claim for damages under the 1998 Act. The house had been searched under warrant. They said that the constable obtaining the warrant had acted on information he knew or ought to have known was false. . .
Cited – Fitzpatrick and Others v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis QBD 11-Jan-2012
The claimants, two solicitors and their employer firm sought damages alleging trespass and malicious procurement by police officers in obtaining and executing search warrants against the firm in 2007 when they were investigating suspected offences . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 September 2022; Ref: scu.244743
(Jersey) Lord Dyson criticised elements of the decision in R v Grant and said: ‘Nevertheless, the Board respectfully considers that the decision in R v Grant was wrong. The statement at para 54 suggests that the deliberate invasion of a suspected person’s right to legal professional privilege is to be assimilated to the abduction and entrapment cases where the balancing exercise will generally lead to a stay of the proceedings. The Board agrees that the deliberate invasion by the police of a suspect’s right to legal professional privilege is a serious affront to the integrity of the justice system which may often lead to the conclusion that the proceedings should be stayed. But the particular circumstances of each case must be considered and carefully weighed in the balance. It was obviously right to hold on the facts in R v Grant that the gravity of the misconduct was a factor which militated in favour of a stay. But as against that, the accused was charged with a most serious crime and, crucially, the misconduct caused no prejudice to the accused. This was not even a case where the ‘but for’ factor had a part to play. The misconduct had no influence on the proceedings at all. In these circumstances, surely the trial judge was entitled to decide in the exercise of his discretion to refuse a stay and the Court of Appeal should not have held that his decision was wrong.’
Lord Hope, Lord Rodger, Lord Brown, Lord Kerr, Lord Dyson
[2011] UKPC 10, [2011] 3 WLR 464, [2011] 2 All ER 513, [2012] 1 AC 22, [2011] 2 Cr App R 29
Criticised – Regina v Grant CACD 4-May-2005
The police had secretly and unlawfully recorded conversations between the defendant and his solicitor whilst he was in custody. The judge rejected a claim of abuse of process. He appealed his conviction for murder.
Held: The appeal was . .
Cited – Brown, Regina v CACD 29-Jul-2015
The claimant, a patient hld at Rampton Hospital faced charges of attempted murder of two nurses. His lwayers had asked for the right to see their client in private, but eth Hospital objected, insisting on the presence of two nurses at all times. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 September 2022; Ref: scu.431375
The claimant challenged a condition imposed by the chief officer of police under section 14(2)(b) prohibiting his group from holding an assembly at a particular location.
One ground of challenge was a failure to give adequate reasons, as to which Bean J said: ‘It seems to me that a distinction is to be drawn – and Mr Hossein-Bor accepted this – between a direction given under section 14(2((a) and a direction given under section 14(2)(b). A direction under section 14(2)(a) is given on the spot in relation to an assembly ‘being held’ by the most senior in rank of the police officers present at the scene. Mr Hossein-Bor accepted that in those circumstances the duty to give reasons does not arise. If the officer says, ‘Stand on the other side of the footpath’, and the demonstrators ask why, the answer may be, quite lawfully, ‘Because I say so’. But the position is different, in my judgment, under section 14(2)(b). Parliament has drawn a distinction between an on-the-spot decision and a decision ‘in relation to an assembly intended to be held’. In the latter case the direction must be given personally by the chief officer of police and must be given in writing.’
Bean J
[2005] EWHC 640 (Admin)
Public Order Act 1986 14(2)(b)
England and Wales
Cited – Jones and Others v The Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis Admn 6-Nov-2019
Distributed Demonstration not within 1986 Act
The claimants, seeking to demonstrate support for the extinction rebellion movement by demonstrating in London, now challenged an order made under the 1986 Act restricting their right to demonstrate.
Held: The XRAU was not a public assembly at . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 September 2022; Ref: scu.224525
The Divisional Court upheld a condition imposed under section 14 of the 1986 Act which prescribed permitted entrance and exit points for an assembly.
[2002] EWHC 110 (Admin)
England and Wales
Cited – Jones and Others v The Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis Admn 6-Nov-2019
Distributed Demonstration not within 1986 Act
The claimants, seeking to demonstrate support for the extinction rebellion movement by demonstrating in London, now challenged an order made under the 1986 Act restricting their right to demonstrate.
Held: The XRAU was not a public assembly at . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.643853
[2010] EWCA Civ 1082
England and Wales
Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.430475
There had been violent conflict between members of different unons in the context of the miners’ strike. The police had found it difficult to maintain the peace. The appellants were four of about sixty striking miners intent on a mass demonstration at one of several nearby collieries. They were stopped by the police when less than five minutes’ journey from the nearest pit, where the police feared a violent episode. The men tried to push on and were arrested.
Held: The court accepted a test of ‘close proximity both in place and time’ and a breach of the peace was held to be ‘imminent and immediate’.
Skinner J
[1985] IRLR 76
England and Wales
Approved – Piddington v Bates 1960
Two entrances to a printing works were picketed by striking printers. A police officer decided that there should be no more than two pickets at each entrance. The defendant wished to join the two pickets at the rear entrance. The officer said two . .
Not preferred – Regina v Howell (Errol) CACD 1981
The court considered the meaning of the legal concept of a breach of the peace.
Held: The essence is to be found in violence or threatened violence. ‘We entertain no doubt that a constable has a power of arrest where there is reasonable . .
Cited – Laporte, Regina (on the application of ) v Chief Constable of Gloucestershire HL 13-Dec-2006
The claimants had been in coaches being driven to take part in a demonstration at an air base. The defendant police officers stopped the coaches en route, and, without allowing any number of the claimants to get off, returned the coaches to London. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.247471
Simon Brown LJ said: ‘Given the PCA’s right under section 76(7)(b) to such other information as they need for the purpose of reaching their section 76 decision, I am inclined to think that, if, after obtaining the complainant’s comments upon any other witnesses’ statements disclosed to him, they thought it necessary, they could require the investigation to be re-opened.’
Lord Justice Simon Brown
[2002] EWCA Civ 389, [2002] UKHRR 985
Police Act 1996 76(7)(b) 80(1)(a)
England and Wales
Appeal from – Regina (Green) v Police Complaints Authority and Others QBD 21-Dec-2001
The applicant complained about a breach of his human rights by police behaviour and sought to inspect statements made by eye witnesses to the incidents complained of. The Police Complaints Authority replied that it was necessary for their function . .
Appeal From – Regina v Police Complaints Authority ex parte Green HL 26-Feb-2004
Discovery was sought of statements created during the investigation of a complaint against a police officer. The claimant argued that a police officer had deliberately driven his car at him.
Held: The investigation by a separate police force . .
Cited – The Independent Police Complaints Commission, Regina (On the Application of) v Commissioner Of Police Of the Metropolis Admn 3-Jul-2009
Delay defeated Request for review
A police dog had bitten a child on his arrest. His mother complained and again at the handling of her complaint by the IPCC. The MPS had disciplined in accordance with a letter from the IPCC, and having acted refused to re-open the complaint.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.170158
The claimant appealed against dismissal of his claim that he had been assaulted in the course of his arrest.
Maurice Kay, Stanley Burnton, Jackson LJJ
[2010] EWCA Civ 1509
England and Wales
Updated: 01 September 2022; Ref: scu.428232
Sales, Moylan LJJ
[2017] EWCA Civ 1808, [2018] ICR D1
England and Wales
See Also – Durrant v Avon and Somerset Constabulary (Practice Note) CA 17-Dec-2013
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.599371
The claimant sought damages alleging police misbehaviour on and after her arrest and being held in the cells.
Seys Llewellyn QC HHJ
[2014] EWCA 2922 (QB)
England and Wales
Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.536542
The defendant appealed against his conviction for assaulting a Community Service Officer in the execution of her duties causing her injury. He said she had not been acting in the course of her duties.
Ouseley J
[2010] EWHC 3400 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.427945
The claimant complained that whilst arrested, he had been denied access to a lawyer.
13081/87, [1988] ECHR 29
European Convention on Human Rights
Human Rights
Cited – Cadder v Her Majesty’s Advocate SC 26-Oct-2010
Statement without lawyer access was inadmissible
The accused complained that he had been convicted for assault and breach of the peace on the basis of a statement made by him during an interview with the police where, under the 1995 Act, he had been denied access to a lawyer.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.427793
The defendant had an accident while driving a car and was tracked to his home by a police dog. He gave a positive specimen of breath standing partly inside and partly outside the house. When told he was being arrested he pulled back into the house and a struggle ensued in the course of which the constable and another policeman entered the house. The defendant’s mother asked the police to leave and they did so, retaining their hold on the defendant, who was later charged with failing to provide a specimen of blood or urine and with assaulting a constable in the execution of his duty. If, as the defence contended, the police were trespassers in the house, that fact would have provided a defence directly to the assault charge and indirectly to the road traffic charge.
Held: Judgment for the crown. McCullough J reviewed the authorities and said: ‘Accordingly, the arrest of the defendant by officers who remained outside his house on land where they were still authorised to be was lawful. Thereafter, they were not engaged in attempting to arrest the defendant. They were engaged in the essentially different exercise of recapturing a prisoner who had escaped from lawful custody. The question which therefore arises in this case is whether such a prisoner can make good his escape from lawful custody by reaching his dwelling house and by refusing permission to enter to the officers pursuing him. . . The rights of officers pursuing those who have escaped are not affected by sections 2 and 3 of the Criminal Law Act 1967. They derive from the common law, and they include the right to break into a dwelling house if need be.’
McCullough J, Griffiths LJ
[1983] RTR 484
England and Wales
Cited – D’Souza v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 15-Oct-1992
The police went to detain the appellant under the 1983 Act. To do so they entered the property against her wishes. She resisted detention, and now appealed her conviction for assaulting the Police officers in the execution of their duty, saying that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.270156
Officers who had retired from the forces on a permanent disablement sought to appeal the assessment of the medical referee.
Held: The practitioner was to assess te degree of disability as at the appeal, not as at the date the officer gave notice to retire. There were clear indications in the regulations that the appeal to the medical referee was by way of a rehearing, because the decision appealed against was the decision of the force, and not from an independent person.
Pill LJ, May LJ
Times 25-May-2005, [2005] EWCA Civ 567, [2005] ICR 1282
Police Pensions Regulations 1987 (1987 No 257) H2
England and Wales
Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.226033
Mr Willcock was stopped for speeding. PC Muckle asked him to show his national registration identity card. Mr Willcock refused. PC Muckle served a notice requiring its production which Mr Willcock ignored. He was prosecuted. He argued that the emergency which had led to the Act had passed. He was convicted by the magistrates, but the magistrates imposed only an absolute discharge. He appealed.
Held: There had been a declaration that the war had come to an end but no Order in Council revoking the Act. Only one emergency was meant – the imminent outbreak of war. The policeman had really wanted the defendant’s vehicle registration number, but was still acting under standing orders requiring them to ask every person stopped to produce the identity card. Lord Goddard ‘That sort of thing tends to make motorists not law-abiding; it tends to cause resentment.’ The Act was being used for a purpose for which it was not passed. A court of seven judges had been convened to decide whether the Act remained in force. It did. It required a specific Order in Council to revoke it. ‘. . . The court wishes to express its emphatic approval of the way in which they [the magistrates] dealt with this case by granting the defendant an absolute discharge. Because the police may have powers, it does not follow that they ought to exercise them on all occasions or as a matter of routine . . . To demand production of the national registration identity card from all and sundry . . . is wholly unreasonable. This Act was passed for security purposes; it was never passed for the purposes for which it is now apparently being used. To use Acts of Parliament passed for particular purposes in war-time when the war ‘is a thing of the past . . . tends to turn law-abiding citizens into law-breakers, which is a most undesirable state of affairs.
Further, in this country we have always prided ourselves on the good feeling that exists between the police and the public, and such action tends to make people resentful of the acts of the police, and inclines them to obstruct the police instead of assisting them.’
Devlin J: ‘I think that it would be very unfortunate if the public were to receive the impression that the continuance of the state of emergency had become a sort of statutory fiction which was used as a means of prolonging legislation initiated in different circumstances and for different purposes.’
Lord Goddard CJ, Sir Raymond Evershed MR, Somervell and Jenkins LJJ, Kilberry, Lynskey and Devlin JJ
[1951] 2 The Times LR 373
National Registration Act 1939 12(4)
England and Wales
Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.223014
(Trinidad and Tobago) A police officer had unjustifiably roughed up, arrested, taken to the police station and locked up Mr Ramanoop, who now sought constitutional redress, including exemplary damages. He did not claim damages for the nominate torts that had certainly been committed. Counsel for the Attorney General submitted that constitutional redress, in so far as it took the form of an award of damages, should be confined to compensatory damages.
Held: The Board upheld the award of vindicatory damages in respect of the officers serious misbehaviour, though these were not exemplary damages or awarded for any punitive purpose.
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead said: ‘Their Lordships view the matter as follows. Section 14 recognises and affirms the court’s power to award remedies for contravention of chapter I rights and freedoms. This jurisdiction is an integral part of the protection chapter I of the Constitution confers on the citizens of Trinidad and Tobago. It is an essential element in the protection intended to be afforded by the Constitution against misuse of state power. Section 14 presupposes that, by exercise of this jurisdiction, the court will be able to afford the wronged citizen effective relief in respect of the state’s violation of a constitutional right. This jurisdiction is separate from and additional to (‘without prejudice to’) all other remedial jurisdiction of the court.
. . When exercising this constitutional jurisdiction the court is concerned to uphold, or vindicate, the constitutional right which has been contravened. A declaration by the court will articulate the fact of the violation, but in most cases more will be required than words. If the person wronged has suffered damage, the court may award him compensation. The comparable common law measure of damages will often be a useful guide in assessing the amount of compensation. But this measure is no more than a guide because the award of compensation under section 14 is discretionary and moreover, the violation of the constitutional right will not always be coterminous with the cause of action at law.
An award of compensation will go some distance towards vindicating the infringed constitutional right. How far it goes will depend on the circumstances, but in principle it may well not suffice. The fact that the right violated was a constitutional right adds an extra dimension to the wrong. An additional award, not necessarily of substantial size, may be needed to reflect the sense of public outrage, emphasise the importance of the constitutional right and the gravity of the breach, and deter further breaches. All these elements have a place in this additional award. ‘Redress’ in section 14 is apt to encompass such an award if the court considers it is required having regard to all the circumstances. Although such an award, where called for, is likely in most cases to cover much the same ground in financial terms as would an award by way of punishment in the strict sense of retribution, punishment in the latter sense is not its object. Accordingly, the expressions ‘punitive damages’ or ‘exemplary damages’ are better avoided as descriptions of this type of additional award . . For these reasons their Lordships are unable to accept the Attorney General’s basic submission that a monetary award under section 14 is confined to an award of compensatory damages in the traditional sense. Bereaux J stated his jurisdiction too narrowly. The matter should be remitted to him, or another judge, to consider whether an additional award of damages of the character described above is appropriate in this case. Their Lordships dismiss this appeal with costs.’
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead
[2005] UKPC 15, [2005] 2 WLR 1324, [2006] 1 AC 328
England and Wales
Cited – Harrikissoon v Attorney-General of Trinidad and Tobago PC 1980
(Trinidad and Tobago) The appellant teacher alleged that he had been transferred from one school to another without proper notice and as punishment. The appellant instead of following a laid out procedure which would have eventually led to a . .
Cited – Merson v Cartwright, The Attorney General PC 13-Oct-2005
(Bahamas) The defendant police had appealed the quantum of damages awarded to the claimant for assault and battery and false imprisonment and malicious prosecution, saying that she had been doubly compensated. The claimant now appealed reduction of . .
Cited – Ashley and Another v Chief Constable of Sussex Police HL 23-Apr-2008
The claimants sought to bring an action for damages after a family member suspected of dealing drugs, was shot by the police. At the time he was naked. The police officer had been acquitted by a criminal court of murder. The chief constable now . .
Cited – Subiah v The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago PC 3-Nov-2008
(Trinidad and Tobago) The Board considered the extent of damages for infringement of the claimant’s constitutional rights. He had been on board a bus. He complained when a policeman was allowed not to buy a ticket. The same constable arrested him as . .
Cited – Takitota v the Attorney General and others PC 18-Mar-2009
(Bahamas) The applicant a tourist had been wrongfully detained in appalling conditions in the Bahamas for over eight years after he lost his documents. He now appealed against an award of $500,000 dollars compensation.
Held: ‘it would not be . .
Cited – Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 23-Mar-2011
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as . .
Cited – Takitota v The Attorney General and Others PC 18-Mar-2009
Bahamas – The claimant appeald as to the amount of compensation awarded to him for his unlawful detention for over eight years, in appalling prison conditions. The Court of Appeal categorised his treatment not only as ‘less than humane’ but as a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.223876
The claimants had made application for tapes held by the respondent to be released. The claimant offered undertakings as to their preservation, and agreement had been reached. The outstanding issue was as to costs. The tapes were recorded by the claimant of the late Diana, Princess of Wales.
Held: To justify retention of a document, or property, it must be necessary in all the circumstances. Had the police been open in their dealings it could have been dealt with more quickly. Despite court orders the tape had been copied whilst in the possession of the police, and it was not for them now to assert that they would keep it more securely. They should pay the costs.
Peter Smith J
[2004] EWHC 2171 (Ch)
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 19 22
England and Wales
Cited – Thakur Persad Jaroo v Attorney-General of Trinidad and Tobago PC 4-Feb-2002
(Trinidad and Tobago) The appellant sought a declaration that his constitutional rights had been infringed. He had bought a car. When told it may be stolen, he took it to the police station, but after he heard nothing and it was not returned. He . .
Cited – Ghani v Jones CA 1970
The court was asked as to the powers of the police to retain objects taken and impounded.
Held: The privacy and possessions of an individual were not to be invaded except for the most compelling reasons.
Lord Denning MR said: ‘Balancing . .
Cited – Gough and Another v The Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police CA 2-Mar-2004
The claimants sought return of vehicle parts from the police. The police replied that the goods had been tampered with in such a way as to suggest they may have been stolen, and that they were therefore kept, even after the finish of the court . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.214645
[2010] EWHC 3009 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.426511
The applicant had demonstrated continuously against the war in Iraq from the pavement outside the House of Commons. The respondent sought an order for his removal under the law preventing demonstrations near Parliament without consent which was passed after the demonstrations began. He said that the demonstration was a continuing one, and the the Act was not retrospective so as to control it.
Held: The court declined to apply the literal interpretation of the statute: ‘if the literal construction of the references to ‘starts’ or ‘start’ leads to the conclusion that the Act does not apply to any demonstration commenced before the relevant provisions of the Act came into force, leaving such a demonstration unregulated by any statute at all because of the disapplication of section 14 of the 1986 Act in section 132(6) of the Act, we would not give it that literal construction but would construe it as we have indicated. ‘
Lord Justice Laws Lady Justice Hallett Lord Justice Clarke
Times 15-May-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 532, [2006] 3 WLR 40, [2006] QB 780
Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005
England and Wales
Cited – McMonagle v Westminster City Council HL 1989
The House treated words as surplusage in a statute which contained criminal sanctions in order to avoid the substantial frustration of the object of the Act. Words in an Act are not to be rendered ‘insensible, absurd or ineffective to achieve its . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions and another, ex parte Spath Holme Limited HL 7-Dec-2000
The section in the 1985 Act created a power to prevent rent increases for tenancies of dwelling-houses for purposes including the alleviation of perceived hardship. Accordingly the Secretary of State could issue regulations whose effect was to limit . .
Cited – Regina v Bristol Magistrates Court ex parte E CA 1998
Simon Brown LJ said: ‘It is a principle of legal policy that a person should not be penalised except under clear law.’ . .
Cited – Liversidge v Sir John Anderson HL 3-Nov-1941
The plaintiff sought damages for false imprisonment. The Secretary of State had refused to disclose certain documents. The question was as to the need for the defendant to justify the use of his powers by disclosing the documents.
Held: The . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v McKeown and Jones HL 20-Feb-1997
A driver was arrested for driving with excess alcohol. At the police station, he was to be tested with the Lion Intoximeter. The officer tested the machine and it calibrated correctly. This was at about a quarter after midnight; the sergeant’s watch . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.241544
Quantum hearing to assess damages to be paid following findings for the claimants by the Court of Appeal on liability for malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office
[2019] EWHC 2339 (QB)
England and Wales
Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.642118
The claimant appealed against rejection of her claim for assault and false imprisonment. The officer arresting her wrongly believed that she had already been arrested, and it was said that he could not have gone through the steps necessary for an arrest.
Held: Under the new section 24, ‘a summary arrest by a police officer will be lawful if (a) the person arrested is about to commit, is committing or has committed an offence or (b) the police officer has reasonable grounds for suspecting this to be so, provided in every case that the arresting officer has reasonable grounds for believing that the arrest is necessary for any of the reasons identified in s24(5).’
Thomas, Moses, Toulson LLJ
[2010] EWCA Civ 1281
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 24, Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 110
England and Wales
Cited – Holgate-Mohammed v Duke HL 1984
A police officer had purported to arrest the plaintiff under the 1967 Act, suspecting her of theft. After interview she was released several hours later without charge. She sought damages alleging wrongful arrest. The judge had found that he had . .
Cited – Chapman v Director of Public Prosecutions CA 1989
The section required a constable to have reasonable grounds for suspecting that an arrestable offence had been committed before he could arrest without warrant.
Held: Bingham LJ said: ‘It is not of course to be expected that a police constable . .
Cited – Hayes v Merseyside Police CA 29-Jul-2011
The claimant had been arrested after a complaint of harassment. The officer then contacted the complainant who then withdrew his complaint. The officer went to visit the complainant to discuss it further. On his return the claimant was released from . .
Cited – Fitzpatrick and Others v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis QBD 11-Jan-2012
The claimants, two solicitors and their employer firm sought damages alleging trespass and malicious procurement by police officers in obtaining and executing search warrants against the firm in 2007 when they were investigating suspected offences . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.426027
The claimant sought to challenge the decision of the respondent not to uphold his complaint against police officers.
Ouseley J
[2010] EWHC 2881 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.425962
The claimant police officer challenged a decision to require him to retire from the police force under a long service agreement.
Wyn Williams J
[2008] EWHC 1183 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.268724
A police officer attended a domestic incident. Not intending to arrest the husband, he nevertheless placed his hand on the defendant to restrain him. The defendant, believing he was being arrested, struggled to escape and the officer was injured.
Held: The judge had misdirected the jury. If, in fact, the restraint was unlawful, then the defendant was entitled to use reasonable force to escape from it. The fact that he believed that the restraint was a lawful arrest did not affect that right.
Lord Justice Kay, Mr Justice Andrew Smith and Judge Colston, QC
Times 17-Jun-2002
England and Wales
Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.173990
The court as asked about when an order may be made under section 9(1) and Schedule 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) to compel the production of a journalist’s note for potential use at a criminal trial.
[2019] EWHC 2756 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.642703
Police officers had attended an address following reports of a domestic disturbance between the appellant and another. Both men were arrested. The appellant objected as the other individual was escorted away by the two officers and placed in the back of a police car. He tried to block the officers’ way and was repeatedly told to stop interfering and to move away. He tried to open the rear door of the police car and to stick his head into the vehicle. At one point, one of the officers attempted to stop the appellant speaking to the other man by barring his way and then by pushing him out of the way. At trial, the appellant made a submission of no case to answer on the basis that the officer had assaulted him when he pushed him. He argued that the officer’s alleged unlawful conduct meant that he was not acting in the execution of his duty, with the consequence that the appellant’s own conduct could not amount to obstruction.
Held: The appeal failed. The push had not been unlawful
Burnett LJ said: ‘The task upon which PC Upshon was engaged, both before and after the push, was in securing one of the arrested men by placing and keeping him in the police car with a view to transporting him to a police station. The officer and his colleague were also engaged in a more general sense in seeking to keep the peace. These aspects encompass the ‘duty’ PC Upshon was in the process of executing.
In my judgment it matters not whether the push was lawful or unlawful in determining the answer to the question whether the appellant was wilfully obstructing PC Upshon in the execution of his duty. The push clearly had no bearing on the question whether the appellant’s conduct before that time amounted to wilful obstruction. On the findings of the magistrates it did. I am unable to see how an unlawful push could retrospectively render conduct lawful, which was otherwise criminal. But equally, if the push were unlawful it does not follow that PC Upshon was any the less acting in the course of the execution of his duty thereafter in dealing with the arrested man in the car. Even on that hypothesis, a person who has been assaulted by a police officer is not liberated from the application of the criminal law prohibiting wilful obstruction of a constable (including that constable) in the execution of his duty. The assault itself could not be characterised as being part of the execution of the officer’s duty. That is why Fraser Wood was entitled to resist when he was restrained. But he would not, for example, have been entitled to block the officers with a view to preventing them making a lawful arrest, dealing with an incident of disorder or executing a search warrant. That would have amounted to wilful obstruction of the officers in the execution of their duty. So too here, even if the appellant was the victim of an assault it provides him with no defence to a charge of obstructing the officer in the execution of his duty regarding the arrested man in the car.’
Burnett LJ and Stewart J
[2015] EWHC 1091 (Admin)
England and Wales
Cited – McCann v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 21-Aug-2015
Appeal by case stated against conviction for obstructing a police officer in the execution of his duty. The appellant had been protesting. She, correctly, thought the land to be a rivate highway. The police officer had thought it a public hghway and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.545872
24029/07, [2010] ECHR 1588
European Convention on Human Rights
Human Rights
See Also – MM v The United Kingdom ECHR 13-Nov-2012
ECHR The applicant complained about the retention and disclosure in the context of a criminal record check of data concerning a caution she received from the police. he applicant, who lived in Northern Ireland, . .
Cited – The Christian Institute and Others v The Lord Advocate SC 28-Jul-2016
(Scotland) By the 2014 Act, the Scottish Parliament had provided that each child should have a named person to monitor that child’s needs, with information about him or her shared as necessary. The Institute objected that the imposed obligation to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425729
The defendant appealed against his conviction for assaulting a police officer in the execution of his duty under section 89. He had argued that he had no case to answer. The officers had received an emergency call to the house, but the female caller had told them then not to come. On arrival, the defendant had told them to get off his property. Fearing violence to a child, the police used CS gas to obtain entry under the 1984 Act and arrested him for breach of the peace.
Held: The appeal failed. The police had information that a child was at risk. They had the power under the 1984 Act to enter to investigate that matter, and their actions were lawful. Since their actions were under the 1984 Act, the questions detailed in Bibby, which dealt with the use of common law powers, did not arise.
Thomas LJ, Fulford J
[2004] EWHC 2717 (Admin)
Police Act 1996 89, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
17(1)(e)
England and Wales
Cited – Bibby v Chief Constable of Essex Police CA 6-Apr-2000
A bailiff sought to execute against goods in a shop against the will of the occupier. The police attended and when tempers were raised the police officer anticipated a breach of the peace by the bailiff and arrested him. He sought damages for that . .
Cited – Albert v Lavin HL 3-Dec-1981
An off duty and out of uniform police officer attempted to restrain the defendant jumping ahead of a bus queue. The defendant struggled, and continued to do so even after being told that of the officer’s status. He said he had not believed that he . .
Cited – Laporte, Regina (on the Application of) v Gloucestershire Constabulary and others Admn 19-Feb-2004
The court considered a claim for judicial review of a police officer’s decision to turn back a number of coaches. Each coach contained passengers en route to join a demonstration at an RAF base in Gloucestershire, the officer honestly and reasonably . .
Cited – Snook v Mannion QBD 1982
The police officer refused to leave premises after being told to ‘Fuck off’.
Held: Whether such words amounted to a withdrawal of the officer’s licence to be on the land was a question of fact in the circumstances. . .
Cited – Davis v Lisle CA 1936
Two police officers, one in plain clothes and the other in uniform, passed by a lorry causing an obstruction in the highway outside a garage. Two men were repairing it. Some minutes later they returned and saw that the lorry had been moved into the . .
Cited – Riley v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 1990
A police officer is not acting in the execution of his duty by arresting or detaining someone unless that arrest or detention is lawful. Justices are not entitled to infer that a police officer was acting in the course of his duty in carrying out a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425319
The applicant had unsuccessfully appealed against his conviction for driving with excess alcohol. He had been stopped randomly to check his documents and the road worthiness of the older car.
Held: The appeal failed. May LJ said: ‘Whether it be under section 163 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, or under a duty at common law, a police officer has the power, provided he or she does not act capriciously or in bad faith, or provided there is no malpractice or oppression or opprobrious behaviour, to stop a motorist on the road. If thereafter there is a reasonable suspicion of drinking, a breath test may be administered.’
May LJ
[2004] EWHC 100 (Admin)
England and Wales
Cited – Beard v Wood 1980
The court discussed the power of a constable to stop a driver.
Held: Provided the officer was acting in good faith the statutory powers given to him he need have no grounds for stopping a driver. Nothing in the section required the prosecutor . .
Cited – Chief Constable of Gwent v Dash 1986
In the absence of malpractice, oppression, caprice or opprobrious behaviour, there is no restriction on the stopping of motorists by a police officer in the execution of his duty and subsequent requirement of a breath test if the officer then and . .
Cited – Steel v Goacher QBD 1985
Griffiths LJ discussed the lawfulness of a police officer’s stopping of a motorist, and said: ‘It should, however, be stated that the police officer was acting within the execution of his duty by virtue of his power at common law and not by virtue . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425318
The claimant had been arrested and investigated for suspected possession of indecent images of children. After many months, the prosecution was discontinued, and he was formally acquitted. He now sought damages from the police for malicious prosecution. He said that the evidence only established the presence of the images, and never went to any knowledge on his part as to their presence, since they were found in temporary folders, but that the police went ahead knowing that they had little prospect of success. The officer replied that he had not been told of the location of the files. The court considered directions.
Held: The outstanding issue was as to whether the officer had been informed of the location of the images. There was no need for further expert evidence. A further hearing would be required to decide on the disclosures required of the police.
Wyn Williams J
[2008] EWHC 2549 (QB)
England and Wales
Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.277150
The police challenged the decision of the defendant to delay the implementation of the pay award made by an independent pay review body.
[2008] EWHC 1173 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 24 August 2022; Ref: scu.270071
Lord Tenterden CJ contrasted the powers of an ordinary citizen and of a police constable to make an arrest. Unlike a private citizen: ‘a constable, having reasonable ground to suspect that a felony has been committed, is authorised to detain the party suspected until inquiry can be made by the proper authorities.’
Lord Tenterden CJ
[1827] 6 B and C 635
England and Wales
Cited – Christie v Leachinsky HL 25-Mar-1947
Arrested Person must be told basis of the Arrest
Police officers appealed against a finding of false imprisonment. The plaintiff had been arrested under the 1921 Act, but this provided no power of arrest (which the appellant knew). The officers might lawfully have arrested the plaintiff for the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 August 2022; Ref: scu.259583
The claimant challenged the right of a custody officer to attach conditions to his bail when releasing him to return to the station under section 34.
Maurice Kay LJ, Burton J
[2007] EWHC 3212 (Admin)
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 34, Police and Justice Act 2006
England and Wales
Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.271213
The defendant had published an article based upon information said to be confidential and leaked from the claimant’s offices. A defamation claimant was suing the defendant in defamation, and the defendant wished to rely on the information in its defence. The present application obtained an interim injunction to restrain that and any other use, and for disclosure of the source of the leak. The defendant now sought further disclosure. The applicants replied that their own duties as police officers restricted that disclosure.
Held: In view of admissions now made by the defamation claimants no further disclosure was required of the present applicants. No order was made for disclosure of the source.
Tugendhat J
[2011] EWHC 1566 (QB)
England and Wales
Cited – Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others HL 28-Oct-1999
Fair Coment on Political Activities
The defendant newspaper had published articles wrongly accusing the claimant, the former Prime Minister of Ireland of duplicity. The paper now appealed, saying that it should have had available to it a defence of qualified privilege because of the . .
Cited – In re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) HL 28-Oct-2004
Inherent High Court power may restrain Publicity
The claimant child’s mother was to be tried for the murder of his brother by poisoning with salt. It was feared that the publicity which would normally attend a trial, would be damaging to S, and an application was made for reporting restrictions to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.441147
[2008] EWHC 2699 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 20 August 2022; Ref: scu.277920
[2009] EWCA Civ 1576
England and Wales
Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.415056
Claim for police injury pension.
King J
[2012] EWHC 1225 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.457759
The claimant appealed against dismissal of his claim for damages for malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office. He had been arrested and held on allegations of serious sexual assaults, but then released when the matter came to the Crown Court. He said that the officers had failed properly to investigate the matter. Though the judge was critical of the investigation, the failings did not establish the breaches complained of.
Held: The appeal failed. The validity of the decision to charge is a question as to the subjective state of the officer’s mind. The inconsistencies shown were not sufficient at that stage to displace the officer’s honest belief. No reason for discontinuance arose until the day on which it in fact occurred. The police failure to submit specimens for forensic examination was dilatoriness, not malice. At all times the officers believed in the truth of the allegations.
Smith LJ answered the the appellant’s submission that: ‘an objective examination of the evidence, if scrupulously careful, would have revealed a number of inconsistencies within the evidence and a number of matters which required clarification. But such examination would not in my view have led a conscientious police officer to any view other than that the appellant was probably guilty. I would hold that the judge was right to hold that there was reasonable and probable cause to commence the prosecution.’
Smith LJ, Wilson LJ, Baron J
[2010] EWCA Civ 524
England and Wales
Cited – Hicks v Faulkner 1878
Before charging a prisoner, a police officer must have ‘an honest belief in the guilt of the accused based upon a full conviction, founded upon reasonable grounds, of the existence of a state of circumstances, which, assuming them to be true, would . .
Cited – Herniman v Smith HL 1938
The court considered the tort of malicious prosecution.
Held: It is the duty of a prosecutor to find out not whether there is a possible defence, but whether there is a reasonable and probable cause for prosecution. The House approved the . .
Cited – Elguzouli-Daf v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and Another CA 16-Nov-1994
The Court upheld decisions striking out actions for negligence brought by claimants who had been arrested and held in custody during criminal investigations which were later discontinued. The Crown Prosecution Service owes no general duty of care to . .
Cited – Hill v Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Police Services Board 4-Oct-2007
Canlii Supreme Court of Canada – Torts – Negligence – Duty of care – Police investigation – Whether police owe duty of care to suspects in criminal investigations – If so, standard of care required by police . .
Cited – Howarth v Gwent Constabulary and Another QBD 1-Nov-2011
The claimant alleged malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office against the defendant. He had been charged with perverting the course of justice. He had worked for a firm of solicitors specialising in defending road traffic prosecutions. . .
Cited – Motasim v Crown Prosecution Service and Others QBD 15-Aug-2017
The claimant had been arrested on suspicion of terrorism, from his innocent association with people later convicted of terrorism. The defendant discovered evidence which would undermine the case against him, but refuse to disclose it. Eventually, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.414949
The claimant had been driving. He suffered a stroke, was arrested by a police officer as driving under the influence of drugs. Medical assistance was delayed at the police station, and the damage from the stroke was permanent.
Held: The actual symptoms were real but not standard stroke symptoms, and he was unable to establish that earlier medical assistance might have improved his outcome.
His Honour Judge Saggerson
[2019] EWHC 2342 (QB)
England and Wales
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.642130
The defendant appealed against the award of damages for assault, false imprisonment and malicious prosection, saying that the question posed for the jury were misdirections, and that the jury’s decision was perverse. The claimant was attending the police station as appropriate adult for her son. Her mobile phine rang, and she was asked to turn it off, whch she did. However her scond phone then rang and the officers took hold or her to forcible remove her from the custody suite.
Held: The appeal failed. The evidence had been difficult and contradictoty, however: ‘there were substantial arguments advanced on behalf of the claimant, Ms Copeland. CCTV, which does not show any blows being struck to PC Bains, despite the fact that there were two blows to the same place, show PC Bains and others who were there immediately after the alleged blows were struck. No attempt was made by PC Bains or the others to arrest or restrain the complainant on the spot, even though she was alleged to have struck him immediately before. He was content for her to stand at the end of the room unrestrained, speaking to PC Townsend. The CCTV, which we have seen, shows PC Bains in that period standing in a relatively relaxed position with his hands on his hips.’
Maurice Kay VP, Moses, Patten LJJ
[2014] EWCA Civ 1014
England and Wales
Cited – Commonwealth Life Assurance Society Limited v Brain 1935
(High Court of Australia) Dixon J said: ‘that no responsibility was incurred by one who confines himself to bringing before some proper authority information which he does not believe, even although in the hope that a prosecution will be instituted, . .
Cited – Castorina v Chief Constable of Surrey CA 10-Jun-1988
Whether an officer had reasonable cause to arrest somebody without a warrant depended upon an objective assessment of the information available to him, and not upon his subjective beliefs. The court had three questions to ask (per Woolf LJ): ‘(a) . .
Cited – Davidson v Chief Constable of North Wales Police and Another CA 31-May-1993
A store detective said the plaintiffs had stolen from the store. He was wrong. The plaintiffs sought damages from the defendant for false imprisonment.
Held: If the police use their own discretion to arrest a suspect, an informer is not liable . .
Cited – Martin v Watson HL 13-Jul-1995
The plaintiff had been falsely reported to the police by the defendant, a neighbour, for indecent exposure whilst standing on a ladder in his garden. He had been arrested and charged, but at a hearing before the Magistrates’ Court, the Crown . .
Cited – Al-Fayed and others v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and others CA 25-Nov-2004
The appellants appealed from dismissal of their claims for wrongful imprisonment by the respondent. Each had attended at a police station for interview on allegations of theft. They had been arrested and held pending interview and then released. Mr . .
Cited – Hunt v AB CA 22-Oct-2009
The claimant sought damages from a woman in malicious prosecution, saying that she had made a false allegation of rape against him. He had served two years in prison.
Held: The claim failed. A complainant is not a prosecutor, and is not liable . .
Cited – The Ministry of Justice (Sued As The Home Office) v Scott CA 20-Nov-2009
The claimant had been falsely accused of assault by five prison officers. The defendant appealed against a refusal to strike out a claim of of malicious prosecution.
Held: Proceedings for malicious prosecution cannot be regarded as being . .
Cited – TTM v London Borough of Hackney and Others CA 14-Jan-2011
The claimant had been found to have been wrongfully detained under section 3. He appealed against rejection of his claim for judicial review and for damages. The court found that his detention was lawful until declared otherwise. He argued that the . .
Cited – Mahon v Rahn and others (No 2) CA 8-Nov-1999
Brooke LJ attempted to draw a distinction between simple cases. . .
Cited – Grobbelaar v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another HL 24-Oct-2002
The claimant appealed against a decision of the Court of Appeal quashing the judgement in his favour for damages for defamation.
Held: The Court of Appeal was not able to quash a jury verdict as perverse, and the appeal succeeded. An appellate . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.535152
The claimant said he had not been given appropriate access to a lawyer when in police custody.
Held: The use of statements obtained at the stage of the police inquiry and the judicial investigation is not inconsistent with article 6(1), provided that the rights of the defence are respected.
28439/03, [2010] ECHR 368
European Convention on Human Rights 6(1)
Cited – Ambrose v Harris, Procurator Fiscal, Oban, etc SC 6-Oct-2011
(Scotland) The appellant had variously been convicted in reliance on evidence gathered at different stages before arrest, but in each case without being informed of any right to see a solicitor. The court was asked, as a devolution issue, at what . .
Cited – McGowan (Procurator Fiscal) v B SC 23-Nov-2011
The appellant complained that after arrest, though he had been advised of his right to legal advice, and had declined the offer, it was still wrong to have his subsequent interview relied upon at his trial.
Held: It was not incompatible with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.403494
The Secretary of State for the Home Department had issued guidance in Circular 55/2003 indicating that the power to suspend a police officer could be used to prevent a resignation and thus ensure the completion of disciplinary proceedings.
Held: Though it was non-statutory guidance because it fell outside the terms of section 87, of the 1996 Act, it had to be taken into account by the decision maker.
Wilkie J
[2004] EWHC 2801 (Admin), [2005] 2 All ER 890, [2005] ACD 34
England and Wales
Cited – Birks, Regina (On the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis Admn 25-Sep-2014
The claimant police officer sought judicial review of a decision to continue his suspension. He had been investigated and cleared after a death in custody. He sought to join the Church of England Ministry and was offered a post. He was re-assured . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.403328
[2009] NIQB 35
Northern Ireland
Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.346507
The claimant challenged the compatibility of section 41 of the 2000 Act with article 5. The section allowed for longer periods of detention by police on application to the Magistrates.
29891/12 – HECOM, [2012] ECHR 1970
European Convention on Human Rights 5, Terrorism Act 2000 41(3)
Human Rights
Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.466368
Renewed application for permission to appeal. The appellant had been wrongly accused of abuse of his child. Though not prosecuted the child had been placed on the protection register.
[2009] EWCA Civ 1515
England and Wales
Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.396641
The police were admitted to have failed to comply with Code of Practice A. The defendant appealed against the conviction on his admission.
Held: A failure to adhere to a requirement in PACE is not mere ‘rigmarole’: ‘These provisions are not a mere rigmarole to be recited like a mantra and then ignored. The provisions of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act and the Code relating to caution, are designed to protect a detainee. They are important protections. They impose significant disciplines upon the police as to how they are to behave. If they can secure a serious conviction in breach of those provisions that is an important matter which undermines the protection of a detainee in the police station’
Moses LJ, Hickinbottom J
[2009] EWHC 3521 (Admin)
England and Wales
Cited – Beeres v Crown Prosecution Service (West Midlands) Admn 13-Feb-2014
The defendant said that his confession should not have been admitted in evidence it having been given when he had not been advised of his rights whilst at the police station because of his inebriation.
Held: The appeal failed. A confession is, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.396502
Having succeeded in her claim as to the lawfulness of the decision of the defendant to end her appointment as a probationary constable, the claimant now sought an order mandating her continued employment by the defendant. She had been acquitted of theft, the prosecution offering no evidence at trial, and no misconduct proceedings had been begun. It had already been found that the decision was unlawful in having not given the claimant opportunity to make representations.
Held: An order for reinstatement was made. The practical problems were real but surmountable. All evidence save that of the chief constable was positive for the claimant. Reinstatement would put right a serious wrong.
Behrens J
[2010] EWHC 31 (Admin)
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v Chief Constable of West Midlands Ex Parte Carroll CA 10-May-1994
A Chief Constable was wrong to dispense with a probationer’s services without giving him a chance to reply. . .
Cited – Khan, Regina (on the Application of) v Chief Constable of Lancashire Admn 30-Jan-2009
. .
Cited – Begley, Regina (on the Application of) v West Midlands Police CA 18-Oct-2001
. .
Cited – Regina v Chief Constable of British Transport Police ex parte William Farmer CA 30-Jul-1999
The probationer constable had assisted another probationer to cheat at his examinations. He appealed his dismissal. . .
See Also – Kay, Regina (On the Application of) v Chief Constable Of Northumbria Police Admn 23-Jul-2009
. .
Cited – Chief Constable of the North Wales Police v Evans HL 1982
The Court found the probationer police constable to have been unlawfully induced to resign, but the court could not order his reinstatement. A power must be exercised by the precise person or body stated in the statute. Though courts may review the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.392989
It is an actionable wrong to procure the issue of a search warrant without reasonable cause and with malice.
(1886) 17 QBD 338
England and Wales
Cited – Gibbs and others v Rea PC 29-Jan-1998
(Cayman Islands) The respondent worked for a bank. He disclosed a business interest, but that interest grew in importance to the point where he resigned in circumstances amounting to constructive dismissal. His home and business officers were raided . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.184700
(Trinidad and Tobago)
Lord Kerr, Lord Sumption, Lord Hodge, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lady Arden
[2018] UKPC 32
England and Wales
Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.631407
[2014] NIQB 59
Justice and Security Act (NI) 2007
Northern Ireland
Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.526662
(Trinidad and Tobago)
Lord Rodger, Lord Walker, Lady Hale, Lord Collins, Lord Kerr
[2009] UKPC 53
Commonwealth
Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.384071
Statement of Facts
42577/07, [2009] ECHR 1988
European Convention on Human Rights
Human Rights
Statement of Facts – Hurst v United Kingdom ECHR 29-Nov-2011
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.383950
This case, involving four different claims, concerns the interrelationship between (a) claims for Judicial Review where the complaint is about the legality of the issue and execution of search warrants and the relief sought is the return of material seized by the police under those warrants, and (b) applications or potential applications by the Police to the Crown Court under s.59 of the 2001 Act for retention of the property which has been seized. The solicitors in particular asserted legal professional privilege.
Simon LJ, Stewart J
[2015] EWHC 3415 (Admin), [2015] WLR(D) 500, [2016] Lloyd’s Rep FC 400, [2016] 4 WLR 74
Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001
England and Wales
Updated: 08 August 2022; Ref: scu.556462
PC (Jamaica) The claimant had been queuing for some time to make an overseas phone call at the Post Office. Eventually his turn came, he picked up the phone and dialled. Suddenly a man intervened, announced ‘police’ and demanded the phone. The man was in fact a police officer. The officer added that he wanted to make a long distance call and told the claimant to let go of the phone. The claimant refused. The officer slapped his hand and then pushed him. When the claimant still refused to let go of the phone the officer pulled out a service revolver and shot him in the head at point blank range. The claimant was rendered unconscious. When he awoke he found himself in a hospital bed surrounded by police officers including the officer who had shot him. The officer arrested him for assaulting a police officer and handcuffed him to the bed. The claimant sought to establish vicarious liability of the respondent who employed the officer.
Held: Vicarious liability is a principle of strict liability. It is a liability for a tort committed by an employee not based on any fault of the employer. It must be kept within clear limits. Nevertheless, the officer had purported to act as a polic officer and later to arrest the claimant. The trial judge was entitled to find vicarious liability established and that the Court of Appeal erred in allowing the appeal.
Lord Steyn: ‘The correct approach is to concentrate on the relative closeness of the connection between the nature of the employment and the particular tort, and to ask whether in looking at the matter in the round, it is just and reasonable to hold the employer vicariously liable.’
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Steyn, Lord Millett, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Carswell
[2004] UKPC 47, No. 30 of 2003, [2005] IRLR 398
Commonwealth
Cited – Lister and Others v Hesley Hall Ltd HL 3-May-2001
A school board employed staff to manage a residential school for vulnerable children. The staff committed sexual abuse of the children. The school denied vicarious liability for the acts of the teachers.
Held: ‘Vicarious liability is legal . .
Cited – Dubai Aluminium Company Limited v Salaam and Others HL 5-Dec-2002
Partners Liable for Dishonest Act of Solicitor
A solicitor had been alleged to have acted dishonestly, having assisted in a fraudulent breach of trust by drafting certain documents. Contributions to the damages were sought from his partners.
Held: The acts complained of were so close to . .
Cited – Weir v Bettison CA 2003
. .
Cited – Bazley v Curry 17-Jun-1999
(Canadian Supreme Court) The court considerd the doctrine of vicarious liability: ‘The policy purposes underlying the imposition of vicarious liability on employers are served only where the wrong is so connected with the employment that it can be . .
Cited – Brown v Robinson and Sentry PC 14-Dec-2004
(Jamaica) The deceased claimant had been shot by a sentry employed by the respondent company. His estate appealed a finding that the sentry was not acting in the course of his employment.
Held: Older authorities had now been replaced by recent . .
Cited – Hutchinson v Metropolitan Police Commissioner and Another QBD 27-Jul-2005
The claimant sought damages for assault by a probationary constable. The constable had been called to a drunken party for Sainsbury’s employees.
Held: The claimant had been assaulted. Miss Morgan had introduced herself as a police officer, had . .
Cited – Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust CA 16-Mar-2005
The claimant had sought damages against his employer, saying that they had failed in their duty to him under the 1997 Act in failing to prevent harassment by a manager. He appealed a strike out of his claim.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The . .
Cited – Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust HL 12-Jul-2006
Employer can be liable for Managers Harassment
The claimant employee sought damages, saying that he had been bullied by his manager and that bullying amounting to harassment under the 1997 Act. The employer now appealed a finding that it was responsible for a tort committed by a manager, saying . .
Cited – Helen Green v DB Group Services (UK) Ltd QBD 1-Aug-2006
The claimant sought damages from her former employers, asserting that workplace bullying and harassment had caused injury to her health. She had had a long term history of depression after being abused as a child, and the evidence was conflicting, . .
Cited – Gravil v Carroll and Another CA 18-Jun-2008
The claimant was injured by an unlawful punch thrown by the first defendant when they played rugby. He sought damages also against the defendant’s club, and now appealed from a finding that they were not vicariously liable. The defendant player’s . .
Cited – Maga v The Trustees of The Birmingham Archdiocese of The Roman Catholic Church CA 16-Mar-2010
The claimant appealed against rejection of his claim for damages after alleging sexual abuse by a catholic priest. The judge had found the church not vicariously liable for the injuries, and that the archdiocese had not been under a duty further to . .
Cited – Various Claimants v The Catholic Child Welfare Society and Others CA 26-Oct-2010
Child sexual abuse was alleged by 150 claimants against staff members of a community home with teachers supplied by the defendants. The court had asked whether they had vicarious liability for the acts of their staff, and now whether the board of . .
Cited – Weddall v Barchester Healthcare Ltd CA 24-Jan-2012
Parties appealed against judgments dismissing their claims of vicarious liability as against their employers after assaults by co-employees.
Held: Appeals were dismissed and allowed according to their facts.
In one case, one employee . .
Cited – The Catholic Child Welfare Society and Others v Various Claimants and The Institute of The Brothers of The Christian Schools and Others SC 21-Nov-2012
Law of vicarious liability is on the move
Former children at the children’s homes had sought damages for sexual and physical abuse. The court heard arguments as to the vicarious liability of the Society for abuse caused by a parish priest visiting the school. The Court of Appeal had found . .
Cited – Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets plc SC 2-Mar-2016
The claimant had been assaulted and racially abused as he left a kiosk at the respondent’s petrol station by a member of staff. A manager had tried to dissuade the assailant, and the claim for damages against the supermarket had failed at first . .
Cited – WM Morrison Supermarkets Plc v Various Claimants SC 1-Apr-2020
A disgruntled senior employee had divulged on the internet personal details of several thousand employees. The claimants alleged that that had been a breach of the 1998 Act, and that the appellants were vicariously liable for that wrong. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 August 2022; Ref: scu.215957
Bean J
[2014] EWHC 2184 (QB)
England and Wales
Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.533771
The AG applied for permission under the 2013 Act to have closed material placed before the court in answer to the claimant’s allegations that as an agent of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, he had suffered after not receiving the protection promised.
Mitting J
[2014] EWHC 2248 (QB)
Justice and Security Act 2013 6(1)
England and Wales
Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.533869
The claimant alleged that his treatment in the police station had been wrongful. His solicitor, representing two clients, had refused to attend the interview with the claimant until he had seen the second client. There was a scene and the solicitor was excluded. The claimant said that this had unlawfully imposed a condition on his right to consult with his solicitor.
Held: The claim succeeded. The claimant’s human rights had been infringed: ‘ in breach of the claimant’s rights under Article 6(3)(c) of the European Convention on Human Rights, the defendant, through the custody officer of Beaumont Leys Police Station, Leicestershire, unlawfully imposed a condition on the claimant’s right to have his solicitor present when he was interviewed, namely, that the interview should proceed before the claimant’s solicitor had had an opportunity to consult with a detainee who was also the solicitor’s client and who had been arrested with the claimant, with the effect that the claimant was unlawfully denied right of access to a solicitor of his choosing when he was interviewed. ‘
Mitting, Keith JJ
[2013] EWHC 4690 (Admin)
European Convention on Human Rights 6(3)(c), Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 67(10)
England and Wales
Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.526586
[2004] UKIPTrib 01 – 62 – 3
England and Wales
Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.525997
(Fifth Section) The applicant complained, in particular, that his continued pre-trial detention had been unjustified and that he had not been legally represented in the early stages of the criminal proceedings.
Held: The court summarised the general principles that are to be found in Salduz. It stated that, as a rule, access to a lawyer must be provided as from the first questioning of a suspect by the police, unless it can be demonstrated in the light of the particular circumstances that there are compelling reasons to restrict that right.
Peer Lorenzen, President
33579/04, [2010] ECHR 2037
European Convention on Human Rights
Human Rights
Cited – Salduz v Turkey ECHR 27-Nov-2008
(Grand Chamber) The applicant had been taken into custody before he was interrogated during his detention by police officers of the anti-terrorism branch of the Izmir Security Directorate.
Held: There had been a violation of art 6(3)(c) of the . .
Cited – Ambrose v Harris, Procurator Fiscal, Oban, etc SC 6-Oct-2011
(Scotland) The appellant had variously been convicted in reliance on evidence gathered at different stages before arrest, but in each case without being informed of any right to see a solicitor. The court was asked, as a devolution issue, at what . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.427249
The claimant appealed against dismissal of his claims for malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office. He had been arrested on suspicion of possessing indecent images of children, but the officer, he said had continued despite its own expert witness’ view that the charge could not be maintained.
Held: The officer having conduct of the case had been found not to have been told of the expert’s view, but the basis for this conclusion by the judge was faulty, and he had failed to analyse properly the documents in the case. There was no alternative but to have a retrial.
Dyson, Carnwath, Hooper LJJ
[2009] EWCA Civ 1259
England and Wales
Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.381660
[2009] EWHC 3004 (Admin)
Cited – Entick v Carrington KBD 1765
The Property of Every Man is Sacred
The King’s Messengers entered the plaintiff’s house and seized his papers under a warrant issued by the Secretary of State, a government minister.
Held: The common law does not recognise interests of state as a justification for allowing what . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.381470
[2008] NIQB 154
Northern Ireland
Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.279831
Custody sergeant need only be available to be called in readily, not present.
Gazette 16-Sep-1992
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 36-1
England and Wales
Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.90169
[2004] UKIPTrib 01 – 77
England and Wales
Updated: 05 August 2022; Ref: scu.525996
The proposed claimant sought leave under the 1983 Act to bring an action for assault and false imprisonment, and further a disapplication of the limitation period to allow a claim out of time. The defendant said that the proposed claimant had been found in a public place and had been to appear to be suffering a mental disorder.
Coulson J
[2009] EWHC 2969 (QB)
Mental Health Act 1983 136 139
Cited – Winch v Jones CA 1986
The court asked as to the criteria which should be applied when considering an application by a mental patient for leave to bring proceedings under section 139: ‘section 139 protects the defendant unless and until the applicant obtains leave. This . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 August 2022; Ref: scu.380361
The applicant, who was arrested and placed in custody, complained that he had been denied access to a lawyer during the initial stages of the criminal proceedings against him.
Held: The court in Salduz had considered the grievance of a lack of access to a lawyer whilst in police custody.
1915/03, [2009] ECHR 1288
European Convention on Human Rights
Cited – Ambrose v Harris, Procurator Fiscal, Oban, etc SC 6-Oct-2011
(Scotland) The appellant had variously been convicted in reliance on evidence gathered at different stages before arrest, but in each case without being informed of any right to see a solicitor. The court was asked, as a devolution issue, at what . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.375441
The claimant appealed against refusal of permission to claim assault by poice officers acting in the course of an arrest of him. He had later been convicted of the offence for which he was arrested.
Longmore, Toulson, Patten LJJ
[2009] EWCA Civ 971
England and Wales
Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.375157
The claimant sought leave to appeal against refusal of judicial review of the Commissions actions on his complaint.
Wall LJ
[2009] EWCA Civ 961
England and Wales
Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.375156
The claimant had obtained a court order requiring the Chief Constable to return certain computer equipment seized by his officers. In the absence of compliance the claimant sought an order for his committal for contempt of court.
Held: The order took effect immediately, but it did not explicitly state as it should have done, the time by which he must comply. In that circumstance no order for committal should be made. The respondent had now given an undertaking to comply with the order, but it was regrettable that proceedings had been necessary to secure this. The claimant might better have proceeded by requesting a correction of the order.
Calvert-Smith J, Lord Justice Stanley Burnton, Mr Justice Wilkie
[2009] EWHC 2293 (Admin), Times 21-Jul-2009
England and Wales
See Also – Bates and Another v Chief Constable of the Avon and Somerset Police and Another Admn 8-May-2009
The claimant had had computers seized by the defendant under searches despite his assertion that they contained legally privileged material. The claimant had been discredited as an expert witness in cases relating to the possession of indecent . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.374727
(Jamaica)
[2007] UKPC 4
Commonwealth
Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.249036
[2004] ScotSC 11
Scotland
Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.195198
[2003] EWHC 3115 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.191228
Moses J
[2004] EWHC 3086 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.226916
Lord Justice Moses
[2012] EWHC 3728 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 31 July 2022; Ref: scu.467642
Judges and witness, including police officers are given immunity from suit in defamation in court proceedings.
Fry LJ said: ‘Why should a witness be able to avail himself of his position in the box and to make without fear of civil consequences a false statement, which in many cases is perjured, and which is malicious and affects the character of another? The rule of law exists, not because the conduct of those persons ought not of itself to be actionable, but because if their conduct was actionable, actions would be brought against judges and witnesses in cases in which they had not spoken with malice, in which they had not spoken with falsehood. It is not a desire to prevent actions from being brought in cases where they ought to be maintained that has led to the adoption of the present rule of law; but it is the fear that if the rule were otherwise, numerous actions would be brought against persons who were merely discharging their duty. It must always be borne in mind that it is not intended to protect malicious and untruthful persons, but that it is intended to protect persons acting bona fide, who under a different rule would be liable, not perhaps to verdicts and judgments against them, but to the vexation of defending actions.’
Privilege applies even though what is said is gratuitous and irrelevant to what proves to be an issue in the issue in the trial.
Lord Brett MR said: ‘The rule of law is that what is said in the course of the administration of the law, is privileged; and the reason of that rule covers a counsel even more than a judge or a witness. To my mind it is illogical to argue that the protection of privilege ought not to exist for a counsel, who deliberately and maliciously slanders another person. The reason of the rule is, that a counsel, who is not malicious and who is acting bona fide, may not be in danger of having actions brought against him. If the rule of law were otherwise, the most innocent of counsel might be unrighteously harassed with suits, and therefore it is better to make the rule of law so large that an innocent counsel shall never be troubled, although by making it so large counsel are included who have been guilty of malice and misconduct.’
Brett MR continued, saying: ‘It was at one time suggested that although witnesses could not be held liable to actions upon the case for defamation, that is, for actions for libel and slander, nevertheless they might be held liable in another and different form of action on the case, namely, an action analogous to an action for malicious prosecution, in which it would be alleged that the statement complained of was false to the knowledge of the witness, and was made maliciously and without reasonable or probable cause. This view has been supported by high authority; but it seems to me wholly untenable. If an action for libel or slander cannot be maintained, how can such an action as I have mentioned be maintained, it being in truth an action for defamation in an altered form? Every objection and every reason, which can be urged against an action for libel or slander, will equally apply against the suggested form of action. Therefore, to my mind, the best way to deal with the suggested form of action is to dispose of it in the words of Crompton J in Henderson v Broomhead, where he said: ‘The attempts to obtain redress for defamation having failed, an effort was made in Revis v Smith to sustain an action analogous to an action for malicious prosecution. That seems to have been done in despair.’ Nothing could be more strong, nothing could shew more clearly his entire disbelief in the possibility of supporting that new form of action.’
Fry LJ, Sir Balliol Brett MR
(1883) 11 QBD 588
England and Wales
Cited – Darker v Chief Constable of The West Midlands Police HL 1-Aug-2000
The plaintiffs had been indicted on counts alleging conspiracy to import drugs and conspiracy to forge traveller’s cheques. During the criminal trial it emerged that there had been such inadequate disclosure by the police that the proceedings were . .
Cited – Silcott v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis CA 24-May-1996
The claimant had been convicted of the murder of PC Blakelock. The only substantial evidence was in the form of the notes of interview he said were fabricated by senior officers. His eventual appeal on this basis was not resisted. He now appealed . .
Cited – Heath v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis CA 20-Jul-2004
The female civilian officer alleged sex discrimination against her by a police officer. Her complaint was heard at an internal disciplinary. She alleged sexual harrassment, and was further humiliated by the all male board’s treatment of her . .
Cited – Taylor and Others v Director of The Serious Fraud Office and Others HL 29-Oct-1998
The defendant had requested the Isle of Man authorities to investigate the part if any taken by the plaintiff in a major fraud. No charges were brought against the plaintiff, but the documents showing suspicion came to be disclosed in the later . .
Cited – General Medical Council v Professor Sir Roy Meadow, Attorney General CA 26-Oct-2006
The GMC appealed against the dismissal of its proceedings for professional misconduct against the respondent doctor, whose expert evidence to a criminal court was the subject of complaint. The doctor said that the evidence given by him was . .
Cited – Westcott v Westcott QBD 30-Oct-2007
The claimant said that his daughter in law had defamed him. She answered that the publication was protected by absolute privilege. She had complained to the police that he had hit her and her infant son.
Held: ‘the process of taking a witness . .
Cited – Westcott v Westcott CA 15-Jul-2008
The defendant was the claimant’s daughter in law. In the course of a bitter divorce she made allegations to the police which were investigated but did not lead to a prosecution. The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim for defamation on the . .
Cited – Iqbal v Mansoor and Others QBD 26-Aug-2011
The claimant sought the disapplication of the limitation period in order to pursue the defendant solicitors, his former employers, in defamation. . .
Cited – Cabassi v Vila 12-Dec-1940
High Court of Australia – The claim sought to sidestep the rule giving immuity to witnesses before a court by alleging a conspiracy to give false evidence.
Held: Starke J said: ‘But it does not matter whether the action is framed as an action . .
Cited – Singh v Moorlands Primary School and Another CA 25-Jul-2013
The claimant was a non-white head teacher, alleging that her school governors and local authority had undermined and had ‘deliberately endorsed a targeted campaign of discrimination, bullying, harassment and victimisation’ against her as an Asian . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 31 July 2022; Ref: scu.184730
[2009] EWHC 2681 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.377558
[2009] EWHC 3152 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.381764
The claimant seeks judicial review of a decision from the then Chief Constable of the Gwent Police dated 20 June 2008 to dispense with his services as a probationer police constable under Regulation 13 of the Police Regulations 2003
Jarman QC HHJ
[2009] EWHC 2083 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.372660
The claimant had joined the police force as a probationary constable. He was dismissed because the chief constable considered that restrictions which they would have to place on his deployments because of events before he was taken on, made his deployment untenable. He had been found not guilty of sexual offences against young girls, but professionals of partner agencies had urged caution.
Held: The chief constable had been entitled to reach the conclusion he had using regulation 13.
Silber J
[2009] EWHC 1879 (Admin)
Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.361466
Silber J
[2009] EWHC 1835 (Admin)
Police Regulations 2003 (SI 2003/527) 13
England and Wales
See Also – Kay, Regina (on The Application of) v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police Admn 18-Jan-2010
Having succeeded in her claim as to the lawfulness of the decision of the defendant to end her appointment as a probationary constable, the claimant now sought an order mandating her continued employment by the defendant. She had been acquitted of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.361462
The claimant sought judicial review of a decision to terminate his secondment to the National Crime Squad. It was said that there had been concerns about his management skills after in investigation into drug related offences by co-officers. The decision was said to be unrelated but subject to matters protected by public interest immunity.
Held: The decision was amenable to judicial review but that the Director General of the NCS had acted fairly notwithstanding the absence of reasons for the decision and the lack of opportunity for the Appellant to make representations.
Harrison J
[2002] EWHC 832 (Admin), [2003] Po LR 1, [2002] ACD 80
Appeal from – Regina (Tucker) v Director General of the National Crime Squad CA 17-Jan-2003
The applicant was a senior officer seconded to the National Crime Squad. He complained that his secondment had been terminated in a manner which was unfair, and left him tainted without opportunity to reply. He appealed against rejection of his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.347796
The claimant sought judicial review of a decision by the respondents that a statement he had sworn in connection with a criminal prosecution should be admissible in forfeiture proceedings now brought by the police following his conviction.
Sir Anthony May, Dobbs J
[2009] EWHC 1546 (Admin)
Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.347436
The Claimant seeks judicial review of the dismissal of his complaint against a police officer in the Hampshire Constabulary for his failure to comply with paragraph 11.13 of Code C of the Codes of Practice, issued pursuant to section 66 of the 1984 Act, in not recording his comments after being cautioned for a suspected driving offence.
Held: The request succeeded.
Lang J
[2015] EWHC 4083 (Admin)
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 66
England and Wales
Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.564427
Turner J
[2013] EWHC 2650 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.514943
The Director challenged the decision of the magistrates to stay a prosecution of the defendant as an abuse of process. The defendant had been interviewed without a solicitor. He went away to seek legal advice. The solicitor requested a copy of the interview tape. None was provided, but a caution offered instead. The defendant refused the caution on advice because without the tape, the solicitor could not establish whether a caution was properly based.
Held: The appeal failed.
Rose LJ said: ‘the justices were fully entitled to conclude that the proceedings should be stayed as an abuse of process, the police having refused to disclose the terms of the interview, without which informed advice and informed consent to a caution could not properly be given. I make it clear that this does not mean that there is a general obligation on the police to disclose material prior to charge. That would, in many cases, be impracticable and, in some cases, (for example where there is an ongoing investigation) highly undesirable, as well as being outwith the contemplation of the legislation, the code or anything to be implied therefrom. But, in the present case, the failure to disclose the terms of the interview followed by the institution and pursuit of a criminal trial in the circumstances described amply justified the justices in reaching the conclusion which they did. ‘
Rose LJ, Silber J
[2001] EWHC 493 (Admin), [2002] 1 Cr App R 16, [2002] 1 WLR 815, [2001] 4 All ER 559
England and Wales
Cited – Wildman v Director of Public Prosecutions CA 23-Jan-2001
Where the prosecutor intended to apply to extend the custody the time limit, he should not be required to produce full documentation in the same way as for the trial itself. Nevertheless, he should produce enough information, according to the . .
Cited – Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Lee Admn 18-Mar-1999
Application for judicial review of CPS decision on disclosure of evidence before committal.
Held: The court recognised an ongoing duty of disclosure from the time of arrest. At the stage before committal, there are continuing obligations on . .
Cited – Regina v Croydon Justices Ex Parte Dean QBD 9-Mar-1993
The applicant a 17 year old assisted the police in a murder investigation on the understanding, induced by the police, that he would not himself be prosecuted. Some weeks later, at the instance of the CPS, the applicant was charged with a lesser . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2022; Ref: scu.406166
The three Claimant were each convicted in the 1980s and 1990s of offences of loitering in a street or public place for the purposes of prostitution. Pursuant to a policy of the First Defendant, the National Police Chiefs’ Council, those convictions are recorded on the Police National Computer and will remain so recorded until the Claimants are one hundred years old. Having ceased prostitution, the Claimants claim that that policy is unlawful, since it interferes with their rights under Article 8 ECHR, is not in accordance with the law, and is disproportionate.
Lord Justice Bean and Mr Justice Garnham
[2021] EWHC 272 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.658124
The claimant, a Specialist Firearms Officer in the Metropolitan Police, challenges the decision of the Independent Office for Police Conduct directing the Metropolitan Police Service to bring misconduct proceedings against him alleging a breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour amounting to gross misconduct. The events which led to the decision occurred on 11 December 2015 when the claimant fired a fatal shot at Jermaine Baker during an intervention in Wood Green, North London.
Lord Justice Flaux
[2019] EWHC 2215 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.640827
Challenge to search warrant
[2019] EWHC 2213 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.640815
The Tribunal considered the Complainants’ application for interim relief in their case before it in the light of undertakings given by the Respondents. It also gave preliminary consideration to appropriate practice to be followed in the event a Closed hearing was requested by the Respondents.
Burton J P, Seabrook QC, Flint QC
[2014] UKIPTrib 13 – 132-9H
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 68(4)
England and Wales
See Also – Belhadj and Others v Security Service and Others (Including Determination) IPT 29-Apr-2015
The court considered the methods used for collection of information by the security services, and gave the following guidance: ‘(i) Whether in fact there has been, prior to 18 November 2014, soliciting, receiving, storing and transmitting by UK . .
Cited – Liberty (The National Council of Civil Liberties) and Others v The Government Communications Headquarters and Others IPT 22-Jun-2015
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.525979
Douglas Brown J
[2003] EWHC 2051 (QB)
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 65(2)(a)
England and Wales
Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.347395
The claimant sought payment under section 25 from the defendant football club for the costs of policing football matches. The defendant said that the sums were not due since the events had been over-policed, and had not been agreed or requested.
Held: The club occupied strictly onlt the stadium itself and implied rights of access. Had the police not provided certain cover, the club would have had to have provided alternative marshalling. Though there was no express request to provide policing, one could clearly be implied. There was insufficient evidence to establish any unfairness in the levels of policing required or the charges. The police were able to bring their case within the requirements for restitution set out in Rowe, and to claim on a quantum meruit according to the actual work undertaken. The court set out the basis for calculating the claim for different categories of officers.
Mann J
[2007] EWHC 3095 (Ch)
Police Act 1996 25, Safety of Sports Grounds Act 1975
England and Wales
Cited – Glasbrook Brothers Limited v Glamorgan County Council HL 1925
A colliery manager asked for police protection for his colliery during a strike. He wanted police officers to be billeted on the premises. The senior police officer for the area was willing to provide protection by a mobile force, but he refused to . .
Cited – Harris v Sheffield United Football Club Ltd CA 1987
The court was asked whether services provided by the police at Sheffield United Football Club for the club’s home fixtures were ‘special police services’ so that, if they were provided at the club’s request, the police could charge for them. Up . .
Cited – Reading Festival Ltd v West Yorkshire Police Authority CA 3-May-2006
The organisers of a music festival in Leeds appealed a decision that they were liable to pay in full a bill from the police for additional services in policing the festival.
Held: The organisers appeal succeeded. Whilst it was a matter for the . .
Cited – Rowe, Regina (on the Application of) v Vale of White Horse District Council Admn 7-Mar-2003
The local council sought to claim payment for sewerage services enjoyed by a householder.
Held: Where a supplier has supplied services to another and there is no contractual relationship in existence, the law may afford to the supplier . .
Distinguished on the facts – Bookmakers’ Afternoon Greyhound Services Ltd v Wilf Gilbert (Staffordshire) Ltd 1994
The bookmaker defendant received a broadcast information service for which he was prepared to pay. That service carried another information service (‘BAGS’) for which the second provider also sought payment. The bookmaker was not prepared to pay for . .
Appeal from – Greater Manchester Police v Wigan Athletic AFC Ltd CA 19-Dec-2008
The parties disputed the amounts payable by a football club to the police for the attendance of police officers at matches. The defendant appealed against a finding that it had requested the services for which charges had been made under section 25 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.262961
Respect for private life
Retention of fingerprints and DNA information in cases where defendant in criminal proceedings is acquitted or discharged: violation
30566/04, 30562/04
European Convetion on Human Rights 8.1
Human Rights
Press Release – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 27-Feb-2008
Grand Chamber – Press Release – The applicant complained of the retention by the police of DNA and fingerprint records – The applicants both complain about the retention of their fingerprints and DNA samples and the fact that they are being used in . .
Legal Summary – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 4-Dec-2008
(Grand Chamber) The applicants complained that on being arrested on suspicion of offences, samples of their DNA had been taken, but then despite being released without conviction, the samples had retained on the Police database.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.640864
[2016] EWHC 1239 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.567866
Lord Justice Maurice Kay
[2012] EWCA Civ 1047
England and Wales
Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.463310
Challenge to Enhanced Criminal Record Certificate
[2012] EWHC 406 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.451810
[2010] NIMaster 4
England and Wales
Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.440693
[2009] EWHC 958 (QB)
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 22
England and Wales
Appeal from – Scopelight Ltd and Others v Chief of Police for Northumbria CA 5-Nov-2009
The claimant sought return of items removed by the defendants under the 1984 Act. A decision had been made against a prosecution by the police. The police wished to hold onto the items to allow a decision from the second defendant.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.346751
