Category: Police

Lamothe and Others v Commissioner of Police Of the Metropolis: CA 25 Oct 1999

The court was asked as to the propriety of the procedure adopted by the circuit judge, who when considering a claim for false imprisonment, assault and trespass had initially acceded to an application by the defendant which was made without notice before deciding in the absence of the claimant first that the defendant’s officers had reasonable grounds for believing the particular person was present in the premises and second that the claimants would be prohibited from asking any questions of the defendants’ witnesses which might reveal the grounds for their belief. The ground of appeal was that the procedure adopted by the circuit judge was contrary to the ordinary rules of procedure and was unfair. Lord Bingham CJ explained that where the complaint was lack of particularity, then the defendant had three choices when faced with the contention that the claim should be struck out as disclosing no defence. They were first to accept that the paragraph should be struck out and second to contend that the paragraphs were unobjectionable while the third course which might be combined with the second course was to accept that the paragraphs were objectionable as they stood but to contend that they could be saved by amendment and by the addition of appropriate particulars. If the defendant felt inhibited from disclosing information, then this would be the proper subject of a claim for Public Iinterest Immunity.

Judges:

Lord Bingham CJ, May LJ

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 3034

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Al Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others QBD 18-Nov-2009
The claimants sought damages from the defendants saying that they had been held and ill treated at various detention centres by foreign authorities, but with the involvement of the defendants. The defendants sought to bring evidence before the court . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Litigation Practice

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.346269

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 ongoing criminal investigations. They are also concerned about the possible future uses of those samples and, in general, that their retention casts suspicion on people who have been acquitted or discharged of crimes. They further contend that, as people without convictions who are no longer suspected criminals, they should be treated in the same way as the rest of the unconvicted population of the United Kingdom. They rely on Articles 8 (right to respect for private life) and 14 (prohibition of discrimination) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 16 August 2004 and declared admissible on 16 January 2007. The Chamber to which the case was assigned decided to relinquish jurisdiction to the Grand Chamber on 10 July 2007.

Citations:

[2008] ECHR 178, 30562/04

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

At Court of Appeal – Regina (on the application of S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, Regina (Marper) v Same CA 12-Sep-2002
The applicants had been charged with offences, but later acquitted. On arrest they had had DNA samples and fingerprints taken, and the details added to the national DNA database. The police refused to remove the records after the acquittals.
At First Instance – Regina (S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire; Regina (Marper) v Same Admn 22-Mar-2002
The police authority took samples of DNA and fingerprints from the claimants whilst under arrest. After their cases had been dismissed or failed, they requested destruction of the samples and records, but this was refused.
Held: There was no . .
At House of Lords – S, Regina (on Application of) v South Yorkshire Police; Regina v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police ex parte Marper HL 22-Jul-2004
Police Retention of Suspects DNA and Fingerprints
The claimants complained that their fingerprints and DNA records taken on arrest had been retained after discharge before trial, saying the retention of the samples infringed their right to private life.
Held: The parts of DNA used for testing . .
See Also – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 16-Jan-2007
Decision as to admissibility – the applicants complained of the retention by police of DNA and fingerprint samples and records.
Held: Admissible. . .

Cited by:

See Also – 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: . .
Press Release – S and Marper v The United Kingdom, (Legal Summary) ECHR 4-Dec-2008
Respect for private life
Retention of fingerprints and DNA information in cases where defendant in criminal proceedings is acquitted or discharged: violation . .
Press Release – 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.

Human Rights, Police

Updated: 26 July 2022; Ref: scu.278518

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 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, in conjunction with art 6(1), because he did not have the benefit of legal assistance while he was in police custody.
It is in the face of the heaviest penalties that respect for the right to a fair trial is to be ensured to the highest possible degree by democratic societies. Neither the legal assistance provided subsequently nor the adversarial nature of the ensuing proceedings could cure the defects which had occurred during the time spent in police custody.
The Grand Chamber concluded: ‘the court finds that in order for the right to a fair trial to remain sufficiently ‘practical and effective’ . . article 6(1) requires that, as a rule, access to a lawyer should be provided as from the first interrogation of a suspect by the police, unless it is demonstrated in the light of the particular circumstances of each case that there are compelling reasons to restrict this right. Even where compelling reasons may exceptionally justify denial of access to a lawyer, such restriction – whatever its justification – must not unduly prejudice the rights of the accused under article 6 . . The rights of the defence will in principle be irretrievably prejudiced when incriminating statements made during police interrogation without access to a lawyer are used for a conviction.’

Judges:

Nicolas Bratza, President

Citations:

[2008] ECHR 1542, 36391/02, (2008) 49 EHRR 421, (2009) 49 EHRR 19, 26 BHRC 223

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6(3)

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

See Also – Salduz v Turkey ECHR 26-Apr-2007
The applicant complained that he had been arrested and detained by anti-terrorist police. At his trial evidence of his statement was challenged on the basis that it had been extracted from him under duress and that he had not had access to a lawyer. . .
Cited – Imbrioscia v Switzerland ECHR 24-Nov-1993
The applicant had been questioned several times without access to a lawyer while he was in police custody.
Held: Overall there had been no breach of article 6(1). The right set out in article 6(3)(c) is one element, among others, of the . .

Cited by:

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 . .
Cited – Gafgen v Germany ECHR 1-Jun-2010
(Grand Chamber) The claimant said that police treatment during his interview had amounted to torture.
Held: The Salduz principles were not restricted to the failure to provide access to a lawyer during interview. There is no clear consensus . .
Cited – Her Majesty’s Advocate v P SC 6-Oct-2011
(Scotland) The appellant had been interviewed by police without being offered access to a solicitor. He complained that the interview and information obtained only through it had been used to found the prosecution.
Held: The admission 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 . .
Cited – Pishchalnikov v Russia ECHR 24-Sep-2009
(First Section) The applicant was interrogated while he was under arrest in police custody. He asked for the assistance of a lawyer during his interrogation, but this was disregarded by the investigator who proceeded to question him. It was argued . .
Cited – Sharkunov and Mezentsev v Russia ECHR 10-Jun-2010
The court was asked as to the lack of legal assistance while in police custody and the use at the trial of incriminating statements that had been made at that stage.
Held: The court repeated the proposition that was first stated in Salduz, . .
Cited – Borotyuk v Ukraine ECHR 16-Dec-2010
(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 . .
Cited – Coulson v Newsgroup Newspapers Ltd QBD 21-Dec-2011
The claimant had been employed by the defendant as editor of a newspaper. On leaving they entered into an agreement which the claimant said required the defendant to pay his legal costs in any action arising regarding his editorship. The defendant . .
Cited – O’Neill v Her Majesty’s Advocate No 2 SC 13-Jun-2013
The appellants had been convicted of murder, it being said that they had disposed of her body at sea. They now said that the delay between being first questioned and being charged infringed their rights to a trial within a reasonable time, and . .
Cited – Gordon v Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (Scotland) SC 22-Mar-2017
The appellant the Commission’s decision not to refer his case back to the court. They had agreed that a miscarriage of justice might have occurred, but concluded that it was not in the interests of justice to make such a referral. His statement had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police

Updated: 25 July 2022; Ref: scu.427789

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 images.
Held: The warrant had been obtained without proper consideration of the question of whether any of the material may be subject to legal professional privilege. The search warrants were unlawful.

Judges:

Richards LJ, Owen J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 942 (Admin), (2009) 173 JP 31

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 8

Cited by:

See Also – Bates, Regina (on the Application of) v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Admn 16-Jun-2009
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 . .
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.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 25 July 2022; Ref: scu.343064

Chief Constable of West Midlands Police, Regina (On the Application of) v Coventry Crown Court: Admn 6 Jun 2000

The Chief Constable sought judicial review of the award against him of costs after a successful appeal against the revocation of a justices’ on-licence for premises in Coventry. The initial revocation had followed the cautioning of members of the licencee’s family, but not the licensee, after drugs had been found on searching the premises. The Chief constable said that he had not acted unreasonably or in bad failth, and the judgment on the successful appeal had contained no criticism.
Held: The request for judicial review succeeded. The judge at the crown court had been wrong to award costs. The judge had not wanted to criticise the police action publicly, but that was inappropriate, but even had the reasons been given they would have fallen short of the level of disapproval required before making an award of costs.

Judges:

Munby J

Citations:

[2000] EWHC 648 (Admin), [2001] LLR 144

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Totnes Licensing Justices, ex parte Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall QBD 28-May-1990
The court considered the award of costs in a licensing case. Roch J said: ‘There can be no doubt that in civil proceedings between litigants, be it in the High Court or county court, the principle is that costs follow the event. The winning party . .
Cited – Regina v Methyr Tydfil Crown Court ex parte Chief Constable Dyfed Powys Police Admn 9-Nov-1998
Where the police had exercised their statutory duty in opposing a transfer of justices licence without being unreasonable or acting in bad faith, they should not be ordered to pay the applicant’s costs after a successful appeal to the Crown . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Licensing, Costs

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.331006

Regina (on the application of S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, Regina (Marper) v Same: CA 12 Sep 2002

The applicants had been charged with offences, but later acquitted. On arrest they had had DNA samples and fingerprints taken, and the details added to the national DNA database. The police refused to remove the records after the acquittals.
Held: The appeals failed. The refusal to remove the records was not an infringement of a right of privacy. How it affected an individual might be a matter of his cultural background. The uses to which the DNA could be put closely matched the section. The presumption of innocence did not provide any protection against being investigated when suspected of crime. No adverse consequences could flow from the data being held unless the applicant committed a crime. The difference in treatment as against persons who had not been suspected of crime was justified.
Waller LJ said: ‘fingerprints and DNA profiles reveal only limited personal information. The physical samples potentially contain very much greater and more personal and detailed information. The anxiety is that science may one day enable analysis of samples to go so far as to obtain information in relation to an individual’s propensity to commit certain crime and be used for that purpose within the language of the present section [Section 82 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001]. It might also be said that the law might be changed in order to allow the samples to be used for purposes other than those identified by the section. It might also be said that while samples are retained there is even now a risk that they will be used in a way that the law does not allow. So, it is said, the aims could be achieved in a less restrictive manner . . Why cannot the aim be achieved by retention of the profiles without retention of the samples?
The answer to [these] points is as I see it as follows. First the retention of samples permits (a) the checking of the integrity and future utility of the DNA database system; (b) a reanalysis for the upgrading of DNA profiles where new technology can improve the discriminating power of the DNA matching process; (c) reanalysis and thus an ability to extract other DNA markers and thus offer benefits in terms of speed, sensitivity and cost of searches of the database; (d) further analysis in investigations of alleged miscarriages of justice; and (e) further analysis so as to be able to identify any analytical or process errors. It is these benefits which must be balanced against the risks identified by Liberty. In relation to those risks, the position in any event is first that any change in the law will have to be itself Convention compliant; second any change in practice would have to be Convention compliant; and third unlawfulness must not be assumed. In my view thus the risks identified are not great, and such as they are they are outweighed by the benefits in achieving the aim of prosecuting and preventing crime.’
Lord Justice Sedley considered that the power of a chief constable to destroy data which he would ordinarily retain had to be exercised in every case, however rare such cases might be, where he or she was satisfied on conscientious consideration that the individual was free of any taint of suspicion. He also noted that the difference between the retention of samples and DNA profiles was that the retention of samples would enable more information to be derived than had previously been possible.

Judges:

Lord Woolf, Waller LJ, Sedley LJ

Citations:

Times 03-Oct-2002, Gazette 17-Oct-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1275, [2003] 1 All ER 148, [2002] All ER (D) 62, [2002] NLJR 1483, [2002] 1 WLR 3223, [2002] 40 LS Gaz R 32, [2003] Crim LR 39

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights Art 8.1 Art 14, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 64

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina (S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire; Regina (Marper) v Same Admn 22-Mar-2002
The police authority took samples of DNA and fingerprints from the claimants whilst under arrest. After their cases had been dismissed or failed, they requested destruction of the samples and records, but this was refused.
Held: There was no . .
Cited – Reyntjens v Belgium ECHR 1992
(Commission) ‘. . The obligation to carry an identity card and to show it to the police when requested to do so does not as such constitute an interference in a person’s private life within the meaning of Article 8 of the Convention’. . .
Cited – Regina v B (Attorney-General’s Reference No 3 of 1999); Regina v Weir CACD 26-May-2000
Where a defendant gave a sample of DNA during an investigation, but the sample was not destroyed on his acquittal, evidence obtained from a cross match relating to a different crime was not admissible. The statute requires the samples to be . .
Cited – Geitling Ruhrkohlen-Verkaufsgesellschaft and Others v ECSC High Authority ECJ 20-Mar-1957
ECJ Article 34 of the treaty is no bar to the admissibility of an application for annulment against an isolated provision of a decision as a whole, because an annulling judgment does not anticipate the measures . .
Cited – British Oxygen Co Ltd v Board of Trade HL 15-Jul-1970
Cylinders containing hydrogen gas were being put on a trailer pulled by a tractor for the purpose of delivery to the premises of the purchaser. One of the issues before the court was whether the function of the hydrogen trailers and the cylinders . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Regina (S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire; Regina (Marper) v Same Admn 22-Mar-2002
The police authority took samples of DNA and fingerprints from the claimants whilst under arrest. After their cases had been dismissed or failed, they requested destruction of the samples and records, but this was refused.
Held: There was no . .
Appeal from – S, Regina (on Application of) v South Yorkshire Police; Regina v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police ex parte Marper HL 22-Jul-2004
Police Retention of Suspects DNA and Fingerprints
The claimants complained that their fingerprints and DNA records taken on arrest had been retained after discharge before trial, saying the retention of the samples infringed their right to private life.
Held: The parts of DNA used for testing . .
At Court of Appeal – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 16-Jan-2007
Decision as to admissibility – the applicants complained of the retention by police of DNA and fingerprint samples and records.
Held: Admissible. . .
At Court of Appeal – 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 . .
At Court of Appeal – 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.

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.177313

Regina (S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire; Regina (Marper) v Same: Admn 22 Mar 2002

The police authority took samples of DNA and fingerprints from the claimants whilst under arrest. After their cases had been dismissed or failed, they requested destruction of the samples and records, but this was refused.
Held: There was no engagement of the applicants’ art 8 rights to privacy. Even if there was, the keeping of the records would be justified under art 8.2. The new section of the 1984 Act was clear, and anyone would know what would happen with samples and fingerprints taken; they would be retained in the absence of special reason otherwise. The provision was ‘necessary in a democratic society for the prevention of disorder or crime’ and was proportionate.

Judges:

Lord Justice Rose and Mr Justice Leveson

Citations:

Times 04-Apr-2002, [2002] EWHC 478 (Admin), [2002] 1 WLR 3223

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8.1 8.2, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 64(1A), Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 82

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Regina (on the application of S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, Regina (Marper) v Same CA 12-Sep-2002
The applicants had been charged with offences, but later acquitted. On arrest they had had DNA samples and fingerprints taken, and the details added to the national DNA database. The police refused to remove the records after the acquittals.

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina (on the application of S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, Regina (Marper) v Same CA 12-Sep-2002
The applicants had been charged with offences, but later acquitted. On arrest they had had DNA samples and fingerprints taken, and the details added to the national DNA database. The police refused to remove the records after the acquittals.
At First Instance – S, Regina (on Application of) v South Yorkshire Police; Regina v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police ex parte Marper HL 22-Jul-2004
Police Retention of Suspects DNA and Fingerprints
The claimants complained that their fingerprints and DNA records taken on arrest had been retained after discharge before trial, saying the retention of the samples infringed their right to private life.
Held: The parts of DNA used for testing . .
At First Instance – 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: . .
At First Instance – 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 . .
At First Instance – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 16-Jan-2007
Decision as to admissibility – the applicants complained of the retention by police of DNA and fingerprint samples and records.
Held: Admissible. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Police, Human Rights

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.168121

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 interference with private life by the police must be objectively justified under Art 8.
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8; Not necessary to examine P1-1; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings

Citations:

Times 01-Oct-1998, 72/1997/856/1065, 24755/94, [1998] ECHR 92, (1998) 27 EHRR 493, [1998] ECHR 92

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Giles, Regina (on the Application of) v Parole Board and Another HL 31-Jul-2003
The defendant had been sentenced for offences of violence, but an additional period was imposed to protect the public. He had been refused leave for reconsideration of that part of his sentence after he completed the normal segment of his sentence. . .
Cited – Keegan v United Kingdom ECHR 18-Jul-2006
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.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.165663

Roberts v Chief Constable of Kent: CA 17 Dec 2008

The claimant had been bitten by a police dog while running away after being asked to provide a sample of breath. He was caught by the dog and then warned that if he attempted to run away again, the dog would be set to catch him. A struggle ensued, and the dog, as it had been trained to do, bit the claimant again. The judge had found the defendant’s officer’s actions lawful under the 1967 Act. He suffered serious biting injuries, and now argued that the use of the dog and the manner of its use was disproportionate.
Held: The judge had taken into account all the correct factors, and no irrelevant ones. The appeal failed.

Judges:

Ward, Jackson, Aikens LJJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 1588

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Law Act 1967 3(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Farrell (Formerly McLaughlin) v The Secretary of State for Defence HL 1980
The purpose of pleadings is to enable the opposing party to know the case against him. Lord Edmund-Davies said that: ‘It has become fashionable in these days to attach decreasing importance to pleadings, and it is beyond doubt that there have been . .
Cited – Pollard v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police CA 28-Apr-1998
Damages for assault by police dog.
Held: Though in principle reasonable force can be used in the course of assisting in the arrest of a suspected offender, that must always be reasonable and proportionate. The claimant’s appeal failed. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Police

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.291919

Armstrong v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police: CA 5 Dec 2008

The Chief Constable appealed against a finding that the claimant had been arrested for rape without reasonable grounds. A description of the rapist had been given which the claimant met in several respects, but from which he clearly differed in others. The appellant suggested that the judge had applied too strict a test.
Held: The appeal succeeded. Though the judge had correctly stated the law, he had not correctly applied it to the facts, and had applied a too severe test for the reasonableness of the officer’s suspicions.

Judges:

Arden, Hallett LJJ, Blackburne J

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 1582

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Dumbell v Roberts CA 1944
The court discussed the nature of reasonable grounds for suspicion for an arrest. The threshold for the existence of reasonable grounds for suspicion is low, and the requirement is limited. Scott LJ said: ‘The protection of the public is safeguarded . .
Cited – Hussien v Chong Fook Kam PC 7-Oct-1969
(Malaysia) The Board considered the propriety of an arrest by the police. Lord Devlin said: ‘An arrest occurs when a police officer states in terms that he is arresting or when he uses force to restrain the individual concerned. It occurs also when . .
Cited – O’Hara v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary HL 21-Nov-1996
Second Hand Knowledge Supports Resaobnable Belief
The plaintiff had been arrested on the basis of the 1984 Act. The officer had no particular knowledge of the plaintiff’s involvement, relying on a briefing which led to the arrest.
Held: A reasonable suspicion upon which an arrest was founded . .
Cited – Hough v Chief Constable of Staffordshire Police CA 14-Feb-2001
Where a constable arrested someone based upon information on the police national computer, he was not to be held accountable for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment, if the information upon which that had in turn been based, did not justify the . .
Cited – Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Raissi CA 12-Nov-2008
The Commissioner appealed against an award of damages for false imprisonment. The claimant had been arrested shortly after a terrorist attack. The judge had held that they had no reasonable belief of his involvement. The Commissioner did not now . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Defence v Al-Skeini and others (The Redress Trust Intervening) HL 13-Jun-2007
Complaints were made as to the deaths of six Iraqi civilians which were the result of actions by a member or members of the British armed forces in Basra. One of them, Mr Baha Mousa, had died as a result of severe maltreatment in a prison occupied . .
Cited – Cumming and others v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police CA 17-Dec-2003
The six claimants sought damages for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment. Each had been arrested on an officer’s suspicion. They operated CCTV equipment, and it appeared that tapes showing the commission of an offence had been tampered with. Each . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.291907

Regina on the Application of PW v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, The London Borough of Richmond-Upon-Thames: Admn 20 Jul 2005

W, a child of 14 sought judicial review of an order to remove persons under the age of 16 from dispersal areas in Richmond.
Held: The issue was whether the power given to police to remove youths was permissive or coercive. The power given ‘is exercisable whenever a person who is believed on reasonable grounds to be under 16 years of age is found between the hours of 9pm and 6am in a dispersal area and the criteria set out in s 30(6)(b) are fulfilled. There is no need for the constable (or CSO) to be satisfied that the child would otherwise be likely to suffer significant harm. ‘ The power given to the police is a power to take them home. ‘Section 30(6) merely confers on the police a very welcome express power to use police resources to take such a person home if he is willing to be taken home. ‘ That power does not include a power to remove a child without his consent. A power to do what would otherwise be tortious behaviour would require clear words, which had not been used.

Judges:

Brooke LJ, Mitting J

Citations:

Times 21-Jul-2005, [2005] 1 WLR 3706, [2005] EWHC 1586 (Admin), [2005] 3 All ER 749

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 30 31, Children Act 1989 46

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Morris v Beardmore HL 1981
Parliament does not intend to authorise tortious conduct except by express provision. It is not for the courts to alter the balance between individual rights and the powers of public officials. The right of privacy is fundamental.
Lord Scarman . .
Cited – Regina v Special Commissioner And Another, ex parte Morgan Grenfell and Co Ltd HL 16-May-2002
The inspector issued a notice requiring production of certain documents. The respondents refused to produce them, saying that they were protected by legal professional privilege.
Held: Legal professional privilege is a fundamental part of . .
Cited – B (A Minor) v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 23-Feb-2000
Prosecution to prove absence of genuine belief
To convict a defendant under the 1960 Act, the prosecution had the burden of proving the absence of a genuine belief in the defendant’s mind that the victim was 14 or over. The Act itself said nothing about any mental element, so the assumption must . .
See Also – W, Regina (on the Application Of) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and others Admn 20-Jul-2005
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Singh and others v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police QBD 4-Nov-2005
A play was presented which was seen by many Sikhs as offensive. Protesters were eventually ordered to disperse under s30 of the 2003 Act. The defendants appealed their convictions for having breached that order, saying that it interfered with their . .
Appeal from – Regina (W) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and Another CA 11-May-2006
The Commissioner appealed against a declaration that an authorisation given for creation of a dispersal area was unlawful.
Held: The proceedings appeared at first to be merely hypothetical, but the issue as to whether a police officer had use . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.228925

CL, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 6 Dec 2018

The claimant sought deletion from police records of reports of his sending sexually explicit images as a child.
Held: Refused.

Judges:

Lord Justice Hickinbottom

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 3333 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Protection of Children Act 1978, European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.631211

X v Germany: ECHR 19 Mar 1981

The Commission had regard to the fact that the purpose for which the children were taken to the police headquarters and kept there for about two hours was to question them, not to arrest or detain them. This led to the conclusion that the action in question did not constitute a deprivation of liberty in the sense of article 5(1).

Citations:

8819/79, [1981] ECHR 8, (1981) 24 DR 158

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 5(1)

Cited by:

Cited – Austin and Another v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis HL 28-Jan-2009
Movement retsriction was not Liberty Deprivation
The claimants had been present during a demonstration policed by the respondent. They appealed against dismissal of their claims for false imprisonment having been prevented from leaving Oxford Circus for over seven hours. The claimants appealed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.280500

Knaggs v The United Kingdom: ECHR 14 Jan 2009

The claimants had been prosecuted following authorised intrusive surveillance. They challenged the laws which prevented them from asking questions about interception, and therefore from defending themselves. The defendants said that the police had deliberately failed to record details which would demonstrate that the recordings had been from an interception rather than the surveillance.
Held: The court posed several preliminary questions to be answered by the parties before the matter could proceed.

Citations:

46559/06, [2009] ECHR 113, [2011] ECHR 1328

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8, Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 17 18, Official Secrets Act 1989 4, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78

Citing:

Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 5 of 2002) HL 14-Oct-2004
The Attorney General sought the correct interpretation of section 17 where a court was asked as to whether evidence obtained from a telephone tapping had been taken from a public or private network. A chief constable suspected that the defendants, . .
Cited – Regina v Austin and others CACD 16-May-2008
The defendants sought leave to appeal against convictions for conspiracy to supply drugs. The prosecutor relied on surveillance evidence showing meetings and telephone calls between the defendants; evidence from recording devices in defendants’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police

Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.280371

Kay v Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis: HL 26 Nov 2008

The claimant had been involved in a monthly cycle ride through central London which had continued for many years. The ride took place without any central organisation and without any route being pre-planned. They objected to being required to apply for a licence and to file a route with the Commissioner under section 11. The question was whether each ride was the same procession, and whether it was ‘commonly or customarily’ held.
Held: Mr Kay’s appeal succeeded. A regular procession need not follow the same route each time. The fact that no person or persons organised the procession meant that no person held any duty under the Act, and section 11 had no application.
Lord Rodger said: ‘if Parliament had actually intended to use the Public Order Act 1986 to outlaw processions of that kind without a predetermined route, then it would not have done so by a side wind in a section creating a system of notification: it would have done so specifically. Section 13 contains a carefully crafted measure which allows councils, with the consent of the Secretary of State, to prohibit public processions in certain specified circumstances. Where the Act contains a specific provision prohibiting certain processions, there is no room for implying into another provision a requirement which would have the effect of prohibiting a different type of procession by exposing the organisers to a criminal conviction and fine.’
Lord Phillips said: ‘Critical Mass is not an organisation but the name given to a recurrent event. It takes place in central London on the evening of the last Friday of every month, as it has done since April 1994. Similar events take place on the last Friday of every month in many other cities throughout the world. Critical Mass starts at the same location, (the South Bank near the National Theatre) at the same time (6 pm). It is featured in Time Out magazine. It is in the nature of Critical Mass that there is no fixed, settled or predetermined route, end-time or destination; where Critical Mass goes, where and what time it ends are all things which are chosen by the actions of the participants on the day.’

Judges:

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

Citations:

[2008] UKHL 69, [2008] 1 WLR 2723, [2009] RTR 16, [2009] HRLR 10, [2009] 2 All ER 935

Links:

Bailii, HL, Times

Statutes:

Public Order Act 1986 11

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At First Instance – Kay v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis Admn 27-Jun-2006
For many years and in many large cities, once a month, cyclists had gathered en masse to cycle through the city in a ‘Critical Mass’ demonstration. There was no central organisation. Clarification was sought as to whether the consent of the police . .
Appeal from – Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis v Kay CA 21-May-2007
The commissioner appealed against a judgment that a mass cycle ride held regularly but over different routes did not first require notice to be given.
Held: The commissioner’s appeal succeeded. The fact that the route changed meant that the . .
Cited – Flockhart v Robinson 1950
A challenge was made to the organising of a procession. Its route was determined by Mr Flockhart as he went along.
Held: For the purposes of section 3(4) of the 1936 Act, a procession ‘is a body of persons moving along a route’ and that, by . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Quintavalle (on behalf of Pro-Life Alliance) HL 13-Mar-2003
Court to seek and Apply Parliamentary Intention
The appellant challenged the practice of permitting cell nuclear replacement (CNR), saying it was either outside the scope of the Act, or was for a purpose which could not be licensed under the Act.
Held: The challenge failed. The court was to . .

Cited by:

Cited – Rolls-Royce plc v Unite the Union CA 14-May-2009
The parties disputed whether the inclusion of length of service within a selection matrix for redundancy purposes would amount to unlawful age discrimination. The court was asked whether it was correct to make a declaratory judgment when the case . .
Cited – Powlesland v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 9-Dec-2013
The defendant apealed against his conviction for having taken part in a public procession, a a Critical Mass Cycle Ride, knowingly in breach of conditions attached to it by the Police. The defendant had argued that the ride was not a procession.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Road Traffic

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278297

Regina v Local Authority and Police Authority in the Midlands ex parte LM: 2000

The applicant owned a bus company whose contract with the local education authority for the provision of school bus services was terminated after the disclosure by the police and the social services department of a past investigation into an allegation of indecent assault on the applicant’s daughter and of an earlier allegation of abuse when he had been employed by social services. The applicant had no criminal convictions and had never been cautioned or bound over. The defendant argued ‘that the requirement for a ‘pressing need’ was not in point because the disclosure of the allegations ‘would not interfere with [the applicant’s] private life at all’.
Held: The court identified three factors to be considered: ‘(i) Its [viz. the discloser’s] own belief as to the truth of the allegation. The greater the conviction that the allegation is true, the more pressing the need for disclosure . .
(ii) The interest of the third party in obtaining the information. The more intense the legitimacy of the interest in the third party in having the information, the more pressing the need to disclose is likely to be . .
(iii) The degree of risk posed by the person if disclosure is not made . .’
and ‘The disclosure, if made, would obviously interfere with his right to a private life . . Disclosure of allegations of child sex abuse is on the face of it a substantial interference with a person’s right to a private life.’
and ‘In my view, the guiding principles for the exercise of the power to disclose in the present case are those enunciated in [AB]. Each of the respondent authorities had to consider the case on its own facts. A blanket approach was impermissible. Having regard to the sensitivity of the issues raised by the allegations of sexual impropriety made against LM, disclosure should only be made if there is a ‘pressing need’. Disclosure should be the exception, and not the rule. That is because the consequences of disclosure of such information for the subject of the allegations can be very damaging indeed.’

Judges:

Dyson J

Citations:

[2000] 1 FCR 736, [2000] 1 FLR 612

Statutes:

Employment Rights Act 1996 111

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (X) v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police CA 30-Jul-2004
The claimant had been accused of offences, but the prosecution had been discontinued when the child victims had failed to identify him. The police had nevertheless notified potential employers and he had been unable to obtain work as a social . .
Cited – L, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis Admn 19-Mar-2006
The court considered the duties on the respondent in providing an enhanced criminal record certificate. In one case, the claimant had brought up her son who was made subject to child protection procedures for neglect. Her job involved supervising . .
Cited – Dr D, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health CA 19-Jul-2006
The doctor complained of the use of Alert letters where he was suspected of sexual abuse of patients, but the allegations were unsubstantiated. He complained particularly that he had been acquitted in a criminal court and then also by the . .
Cited – L, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Another CA 1-Mar-2007
The court considered the proper content of an enhanced criminal record certificate. The claimant said that it should contain only matter relating to actual or potential criminal activity.
Held: As to the meaning of section 115: ‘if Parliament . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.242941

Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd, (Regina on the Application of ) v Serious Fraud Office and Another: Admn 17 Dec 2003

The claimant sought judicial review of the decision of the respondent to disclose documents obtained by it from them during an investigation.
Held: The decisions to disclose material to the DoH were ‘in accordance with law’ within the meaning of Article 8(2), notwithstanding the width of the discretion conferred by section 3(5)(a). The claimant should have been allowed opportunity to make representations before disclosure, and the disclosure was unfair, but in the circumstances no damages were to be awarded.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Maurice Kay The Honourable Mr Justice Mackay

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 3002 (Admin), Times 06-Jan-2004

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1987 2(5), Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 19, European Convention on Human Rights 8(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – The Sunday Times (No 1) v The United Kingdom ECHR 26-Apr-1979
Offence must be ;in accordance with law’
The court considered the meaning of the need for an offence to be ‘in accordance with law.’ The applicants did not argue that the expression prescribed by law required legislation in every case, but contended that legislation was required only where . .
Cited – Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police HL 19-Nov-1981
No collateral attack on Jury findigs.
An attempt was made to open up in a civil action, allegations of assaults by the police prior to the making of confessions which had been disposed of in a voir dire in the course of a criminal trial. The plaintiffs had imprisoned having spent many . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment, ex parte Hackney London Borough Council CA 1984
The court doubted whether the doctrine of issue estoppel is applicable in judicial review proceedings. After holding that on the facts of the case it did not arise as a defence, the court approved, by the way, the judgment at first instance which . .
Cited – Domenichini v Italy ECHR 15-Nov-1996
The court was concerned with the monitoring of the correspondence of prisoners, including legal correspondence. The Italian law permitted such monitoring if a judge, in his discretion, ordered it in a reasoned decision.
Held: ‘The Court . .
Cited – Opoku, Regina (on the Application of) v Principal of Southwark College and Another Admn 17-Oct-2002
The claimant sought permission to add grounds to his application for leave to bring a judicial review.
Held: There was no specific rule excluding a court from granting such a rule. Here however there was no change to support any such . .
Cited – Regina v Chesterfield Justices and Others, Ex Parte Bramley QBD 10-Nov-1999
When police officers executed a search warrant, it was not proper to remove articles at large, in order later to sift through them, and then to return material not covered by the warrant. There is no absolute prohibition against removing articles . .
Cited – Klass And Others v Germany ECHR 6-Sep-1978
(Plenary Court) The claimant objected to the disclosure by the police of matters revealed during their investigation, but in this case, it was held, disclosure even after the event ‘might well jeopardise the long-term purpose that originally . .
Cited – Regina v Chief Constable of North Wales Police and Others Ex Parte Thorpe and Another; Regina v Chief Constable for North Wales Police Area and others ex parte AB and CB CA 18-Mar-1998
Public Identification of Pedophiles by Police
AB and CB had been released from prison after serving sentences for sexual assaults on children. They were thought still to be dangerous. They moved about the country to escape identification, and came to be staying on a campsite. The police sought . .
Cited – Woolgar v Chief Constable of Sussex Police and UKCC CA 26-May-1999
The issue was the potential disclosure by the police to the nurses’ regulatory body of confidential information concerning the plaintiff, the matron of a nursing home. There had been insufficient evidence to charge the plaintiff with a criminal . .
Cited – Marcel v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis CA 1992
A writ of subpoena ad duces tecum had been issued requiring the production by the police for use in civil proceedings of documents seized during a criminal fraud investigation. The victim of the fraud needed them to pursue his own civil case.
Cited – Golder v The United Kingdom ECHR 21-Feb-1975
G was a prisoner who was refused permission by the Home Secretary to consult a solicitor with a view to bringing libel proceedings against a prison officer. The court construed article 6 of ECHR, which provides that ‘in the determination of his . .
Cited – Tinnelly and Sons Ltd and Others and McElduff and Others v United Kingdom ECHR 10-Jul-1998
Legislation which disallowed claimants who asserted that they had been discriminated against, on the grounds of their religious background, from appealing through the courts system, was a clear breach of their human rights. A limitation will not be . .
Appealed to – Regina (Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd) v Serious Fraud Office CA 11-Nov-2004
In 2002 the SFO was investigating allegations that drug companies were selling generic drugs, including penicillin-based antibiotics and warfarin, to the National Health Service at artificially sustained prices. To further the investigation the SFO . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina (Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd) v Serious Fraud Office CA 11-Nov-2004
In 2002 the SFO was investigating allegations that drug companies were selling generic drugs, including penicillin-based antibiotics and warfarin, to the National Health Service at artificially sustained prices. To further the investigation the SFO . .
Cited – Energy Financing Team Ltd and others v The Director of the Serious Fraud Office, Bow Street Magistrates Court Admn 22-Jul-2005
The claimants sought to set aside warrants and executions under them to provide assistance to a foreign court investigating alleged unlawful assistance to companies in Bosnia Herzegovina.
Held: The issue of such a warrant was a serious step. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Criminal Practice, Judicial Review, Human Rights

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.189144

Burke, Regina (on The Application of) v Independent Police Complaints Commission and Others: Admn 8 Mar 2011

The claimant had complained of police behaviour. The police notified him of the rejection of the complaint, but he said he did not receive it. He sought to appeal out of time. He now sought review of the refusal of the respondent to extend the period to allow him to appeal.
Held: The decision was neither irrational nor unreasonable.

Judges:

Wyn Williams J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 423 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2004, Police Reform Act 2002

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.430371

Mason v Orr: SCS 28 Nov 1901

Action directed against the Superintendent of the Central Division of the Glasgow Police for an alleged assault, and the question is whether a relevant case has been stated.

Judges:

Lord M’Laren

Citations:

[1901] ScotCS CSIH – 1, (1901) 4 F 220, (1901) 9 SLT 269, [1901] SLR 39 – 148

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Torts – Other, Police

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.279256

Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Jan 2007

Decision as to admissibility – the applicants complained of the retention by police of DNA and fingerprint samples and records.
Held: Admissible.

Judges:

J. Casadevall, P

Citations:

[2007] EHCR 110, 30562/04

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

At Court of Appeal – Regina (on the application of S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, Regina (Marper) v Same CA 12-Sep-2002
The applicants had been charged with offences, but later acquitted. On arrest they had had DNA samples and fingerprints taken, and the details added to the national DNA database. The police refused to remove the records after the acquittals.
At First Instance – Regina (S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire; Regina (Marper) v Same Admn 22-Mar-2002
The police authority took samples of DNA and fingerprints from the claimants whilst under arrest. After their cases had been dismissed or failed, they requested destruction of the samples and records, but this was refused.
Held: There was no . .
At House of Lords – S, Regina (on Application of) v South Yorkshire Police; Regina v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police ex parte Marper HL 22-Jul-2004
Police Retention of Suspects DNA and Fingerprints
The claimants complained that their fingerprints and DNA records taken on arrest had been retained after discharge before trial, saying the retention of the samples infringed their right to private life.
Held: The parts of DNA used for testing . .

Cited by:

See Also – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.278517

Regina v Marylebone Magistrates Court and Another ex parte Amdrell Ltd T/S ‘Get Stuffed’ and Others: QBD 17 Sep 1998

How the police execute a warrant must be an operational matter for them, but the involvement of media in press briefings and in attending the execution of warrants must be deplored as reducing the chances of a fair trial.

Citations:

Times 17-Sep-1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Media

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.87290

Cemalettin Canli v Turkey: ECHR 18 Nov 2008

The Court found interference in the applicant’s right to respect of his private life in that the police prepared and submitted to a domestic court an inaccurate report in the context of criminal proceedings against him.

Citations:

22427/04, [2008] ECHR 1458

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – L, Regina (On the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis SC 29-Oct-2009
Rebalancing of Enhanced Disclosure Requirements
The Court was asked as to the practice of supplying enhanced criminal record certificates under the 1997 Act. It was said that the release of reports of suspicions was a disproportionate interference in the claimants article 8 rights to a private . .
See Also – Cemalettin Canli v Turkey ECHR 13-Dec-2011
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights . .
Cited – JR38, Re Application for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) SC 1-Jul-2015
The appellant was now 18 years old. In July 2010 two newspapers published an image of him. He was at that time barely 14 years old. These photographs had been published by the newspapers at the request of the police. The publication of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.278145

Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Raissi: CA 12 Nov 2008

The Commissioner appealed against an award of damages for false imprisonment. The claimant had been arrested shortly after a terrorist attack. The judge had held that they had no reasonable belief of his involvement. The Commissioner did not now pursue an argument of necessity.
Held: The only cause suggested for suspicion of the claimant was that he was the brother of a suspect, that they lived not far apart and that each had access to the other’s house. That was not reasonable cause for suspicion.
Sir Anthony Clarke MR considered how the lawfulness of a police officer’s decision to arrest was to be tested: ‘(1) Did the arresting officer suspect that the person who was arrested was guilty of the offence? The answer to this question depends entirely on the findings of fact as to the officer’s state of mind.
(2) Assuming the officer had the necessary suspicion, was there reasonable cause for suspicion? This is a purely objective requirement to be determined by the judge if necessary on the facts found by a jury.
(3) If the answer to the two previous questions is in the affirmative, then the officer has a discretion which entitles him to make an arrest and in relation to that discretion has [to be] exercised in accordance with the principles laid down’

Judges:

Sir Anthony Clarke MR, Maurice Kay LJ, Stanley Burnton LJ

Citations:

[2009] 3 All ER 14, [2009] PTSR 666, [2009] 2 WLR 1243, [2009] QB 564, [2008] EWCA Civ 1237

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Terrorism Act 2000 40

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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 – 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) . .
Distinguished – McKee v Chief Constable for Northern Ireland HL 1984
The House considered the state of mind of an officer required to allow an arrest under the section.
Held: Lord Roskill said: ‘On the true construction of section 11(1) of the statute, what matters is the state of mind of the arresting officer . .
Cited – O’Hara v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary HL 21-Nov-1996
Second Hand Knowledge Supports Resaobnable Belief
The plaintiff had been arrested on the basis of the 1984 Act. The officer had no particular knowledge of the plaintiff’s involvement, relying on a briefing which led to the arrest.
Held: A reasonable suspicion upon which an arrest was founded . .
Cited – Dumbell v Roberts CA 1944
The court discussed the nature of reasonable grounds for suspicion for an arrest. The threshold for the existence of reasonable grounds for suspicion is low, and the requirement is limited. Scott LJ said: ‘The protection of the public is safeguarded . .
Cited – Cumming and others v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police CA 17-Dec-2003
The six claimants sought damages for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment. Each had been arrested on an officer’s suspicion. They operated CCTV equipment, and it appeared that tapes showing the commission of an offence had been tampered with. Each . .
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 – Regina v Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall ex parte CEGB CA 1982
An unwanted kiss may be a battery. Lawton LJ discussed the individual responsibility of a police officer: ‘[chief constables] cannot give an officer under command an order to do acts which can only lawfully be done if the officer himself with . .
Cited – Regina v Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall, Ex parte Central Electricity Generating Board CA 1982
The CEGB wanted to undertake a survey using its statutory powers to check whether land might be suitable for a nuclear power station, and wanted the police to prevent demonstrators from preventing the survey. It now requested an order of mandamus to . .
Cited – Hussien v Chong Fook Kam PC 7-Oct-1969
(Malaysia) The Board considered the propriety of an arrest by the police. Lord Devlin said: ‘An arrest occurs when a police officer states in terms that he is arresting or when he uses force to restrain the individual concerned. It occurs also when . .
Cited – Dallison v Caffery CACD 1965
It is for the detaining authority to justify all periods of detention.
The court described the common law duty on a prosecutor to disclose material. Lord Denning MR said: ‘The duty of a prosecuting counsel or solicitor, as I have always . .

Cited by:

Cited – Alford v Cambridgeshire Police CA 24-Feb-2009
The claimant police officer had been held after an accident when he was in a high speed pursuit of a vehicle into the neighbouring respondent’s area. The prosecution had been discontinued, and he now appealed against rejection of his claims for . .
Cited – Armstrong v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police CA 5-Dec-2008
The Chief Constable appealed against a finding that the claimant had been arrested for rape without reasonable grounds. A description of the rapist had been given which the claimant met in several respects, but from which he clearly differed in . .
Cited – Howarth v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis QBD 3-Nov-2011
The claimant sought judicial review of a decision to search him whilst travelling to a public protest in London. A previous demonstration involving this group had resulted in criminal damage, but neither the claimant nor his companions were found to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.277775

Reynolds, Regina (on the Application of) v Independent Police Complaints Commission and Another: CA 22 Oct 2008

The court was asked to consider whether the IPCC could investigate the circumstances leading to the arrest of a suspect who fell into a coma after being arrested for being drunk. The IPCC appealed, saying that it did not have jurisdiction to investigate matters before the arrest.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. Longmore LJ said: ‘the IPCC pursuant to section 10 and paragraph 14D of Schedule 3 has both a power and a duty to investigate both cases of death or serious injury in custody and cases in which a complaint is made about the police. In the present case there has been a serious injury which manifested itself while Mr Reynolds was in police custody; the claimant has, moreover, made a formal complaint to the IPCC about that matter. That being the case it is a relevant question whether the injury to Mr Reynolds was caused by the conduct of police officers. It is obviously possible that such injury was caused at the time of arrest and detention when Mr Reynolds’ head hit the ground. It is also possible that it was caused at a time before Mr Reynolds came into contact with the police. It is not possible to determine whether the conduct of the police caused or contributed to Mr Reynolds’ injury without, at least, considering any evidence there might be pointing to a competing cause. If that competing cause occurred prior to police contact, that cause must be considered just as much as if that competing cause was during police custody; otherwise the IPCC cannot determine whether the injury was caused or contributed to by the police which is the whole point of the investigation. ‘ and
‘It is . . for the police not the IPCC to conduct investigations into possible criminal conduct of members of the public. But it is for the Commission to investigate possible misconduct on the part of the police. That will often require the Commission to investigate whether death or serious injury was caused by the police or by someone (or something) else. That is an inquiry into causation. ‘

Judges:

Ward, Longmore, Jackson LJJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 1160, [2009] ACD 51, [2009] 3 All ER 237

Links:

Bailii, Times

Statutes:

Police Reform Act 2002 10, Serious Organised Crime Act 2005 160

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Reynolds, Regina (on the Application of) v Sussex Police and Another Admn 16-May-2008
The complainant’s brother had been arrested for being drunk. After a time in a cell, he was found unwell and fell into a coma. Complaints were made of his treatment. The Police Complaints Commission was to investigate the events after the arrest . .
Cited – Stephen Jordan (No 2) v The United Kingdom ECHR 10-Dec-2002
The applicant was a soldier who had been court marshalled for misuse of travel warrants. He wished to use in his defence his recent epilepsy. There was some delay while medical reports were obtained, and subsequently when the new legal system was . .
Cited – Amin, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Oct-2003
Prisoner’s death – need for full public enquiry
The deceased had been a young Asian prisoner. He was placed in a cell overnight with a prisoner known to be racist, extremely violent and mentally unstable. He was killed. The family sought an inquiry into the death.
Held: There had been a . .
Cited – Yasa v Turkey ECHR 2-Sep-1998
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (victim); Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); No violation of Art. 2; Violation of Art. 2 (effective investigation); . .
Cited – Menson v United Kingdom ECHR 6-May-2003
There had been a racist attack. The victim was set on fire and killed in the street by assailants. His relatives sought compensation. However the assailants were not agents of the state and they were duly prosecuted, convicted and sentenced. No . .
Cited – Angelova And Iliev v Bulgaria ECHR 26-Jul-2007
The applicants were mother and brother of a Roma man who had been stabbed to death by a gang of teenagers. They did not suggest any direct involvement of the state, but complained of inadequacies in the police investigation.
Held: The absence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.277110

Nicol and Selvanayagam v United Kingdom: ECHR 11 Jan 2001

(Admissibility) The applicants took part in an anti-fishing protest at an angling match on 28 May 1994. Their aim was to sabotage the match by throwing twigs in the water close to the anglers’ hooks so as to disturb the surface, while other protestors sounded horns to frighten the fish. When they refused to stop, they were arrested. The custody record gave the reason for their initial detention as to ‘allow a period of calming, and to determine method of processing’. They were later kept in custody in order to take them before the magistrates for the purpose of being bound over to keep the peace.
Held: The complaint under article 5.1 was manifestly unfounded. The initial detention was to prevent them from committing an offence and their continued detention was for the purpose of bringing them before the court on suspicion of having committed an ‘offence’. Both the initial arrest and their subsequent detention were therefore compatible with article 5.1(c).

Judges:

G Ress P

Citations:

[2001] ECHR 900, 32213/96

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v Nicol and Selvanayagam QBD 10-Nov-1995
The appellants appealed a bind-over for a finding that each appellant had been guilty of conduct whereby a breach of the peace was likely to be occasioned. The appellants, concerned about cruelty to animals, had obstructed an angling competition by . .

Cited by:

Cited – Hicks and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis SC 15-Feb-2017
The claimants had wanted to make a peaceful anti-monarchist demonstration during the wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. They complained that the actions of the respondent police infringed their human rights by preventing that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.640530

Hicks and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis: SC 15 Feb 2017

The claimants had wanted to make a peaceful anti-monarchist demonstration during the wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. They complained that the actions of the respondent police infringed their human rights by preventing that demonstration.
Held: The appeal failed.
The fundamental principle underlying article 5 is the need to protect the individual from arbitrary detention, and an essential part of that protection is timely judicial control, but at the same time article 5 must not be interpreted in such a way as would make it impracticable for the police to perform their duty to maintain public order and protect the lives and property of others. These twin requirements are not contradictory but complementary

Judges:

Lord Mance, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath, Lord Toulson, Lord Dyson

Citations:

[2017] UKSC 9, [2017] WLR(D) 101, [2017] 2 WLR 824, [2017] 1 AC 25

Links:

Bailii, WLRD, Bailii Summary

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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 . .
Appeal from – Hicks and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis CA 22-Jan-2014
The claimants said that the restrictive tactics used by the respondent when policing crowds at a royal wedding.
Held: The appeals failed. The police had reasonable grounds for suspecting that the claimants were likely to cause a breach of the . .
Cited – Steel and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 23-Sep-1998
The several applicants had been arrested in different circumstances and each charged with breach of the peace contrary to common law. Under the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980, the court can bind over a Defendant to keep the peace, if the Defendant . .
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. . .
At First Instance – Hicks and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis Admn 18-Jul-2012
The claimants challnged the lawfulness of decisions made by the respondent as to the policing of events surrounding the Royal Wedding in April 2011. . .
Not followed – Ostendorf v Germany ECHR 7-Mar-2013
The applicant was registered on a German database as a person prepared to use violence in the context of sports events. He travelled with a group of others from Bremen to Frankfurt in order to attend a football match. They were kept under police . .
Cited – Lawless v Ireland (No 3) ECHR 1-Jul-1961
The Irish Government derogated from article 5 in July 1957 in order to permit detention without charge or trial, and the applicant was detained between July and December 1957. He could have obtained his release by undertaking to observe the law and . .
Cited – Guardian News and Media Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court CA 3-Apr-2012
The newspaper applied for leave to access documents referred to but not released during the course of extradition proceedings in open court.
Held: The application was to be allowed. Though extradition proceedings were not governed by the Civil . .
Cited – Brogan and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 29-Nov-1988
ECHR Judgment (Merits) – Violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. 5-5; No violation of Art. 5-1; No violation of Art. 5-4; Not necessary to examine Art. 13; Just satisfaction reserved.
The four applicants . .
Incomplete – Jecius v Lithuania ECHR 31-Jul-2000
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (six month period); Violation of Art. 5-1 as regards the applicant
The applicant complained of violation of his article 5 rights . .
Cited – Nicol and Selvanayagam v United Kingdom ECHR 11-Jan-2001
(Admissibility) The applicants took part in an anti-fishing protest at an angling match on 28 May 1994. Their aim was to sabotage the match by throwing twigs in the water close to the anglers’ hooks so as to disturb the surface, while other . .
Cited – Schwabe and MG v Germany ECHR 1-Dec-2011
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.575310

Regina (Austen and others) v Chief Constable of Wiltshire: Admn 2011

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 3385 (Admin)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – AB and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Huddersfield Magistrates’ Court and Another Admn 10-Apr-2014
The claimants challenged the lawfuness of search warrants issued by the respondent court. They were solicitors, and were related to a person suspected of murder who was thought to have fled the country. The officers were looking for evidence that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Magistrates

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.523728

Hicks and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis: CA 22 Jan 2014

The claimants said that the restrictive tactics used by the respondent when policing crowds at a royal wedding.
Held: The appeals failed. The police had reasonable grounds for suspecting that the claimants were likely to cause a breach of the peace, and the arrests and holding for court were not unnecessary.
Held: The decision was upheld, but for differing reasons.
It was well established in the Strasbourg jurisprudence that the words ‘for the purpose of bringing him before the competent legal authority’ govern all the limbs of article 5.1(c) and that English courts should accept that interpretation. It was ‘an irresistible inference that the officers who arrested and detained the [appellants] appreciated that, if only by reference to domestic law, the [appellants] could not be lawfully detained beyond the point at which it was reasonably practicable to take them before the magistrates’ court’.

Judges:

Lord Justice Maurice Kay, Vice President of the Court of Appeal, Civil Division, Lord Justice Leveson, and, Lord Justice Aikens

Citations:

[2014] EWCA Civ 3, [2014] 2 Cr App R 4, [2014] WLR(D) 30, [2014] HRLR 11, [2014] 1 WLR 2152, [2014] Crim LR 681

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Hicks and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis Admn 18-Jul-2012
The claimants challnged the lawfulness of decisions made by the respondent as to the policing of events surrounding the Royal Wedding in April 2011. . .
Cited – Ostendorf v Germany ECHR 7-Mar-2013
The applicant was registered on a German database as a person prepared to use violence in the context of sports events. He travelled with a group of others from Bremen to Frankfurt in order to attend a football match. They were kept under police . .
Cited – Lawless v Ireland (No 3) ECHR 1-Jul-1961
The Irish Government derogated from article 5 in July 1957 in order to permit detention without charge or trial, and the applicant was detained between July and December 1957. He could have obtained his release by undertaking to observe the law and . .
Incomplete – Jecius v Lithuania ECHR 31-Jul-2000
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (six month period); Violation of Art. 5-1 as regards the applicant
The applicant complained of violation of his article 5 rights . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Hicks and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis SC 15-Feb-2017
The claimants had wanted to make a peaceful anti-monarchist demonstration during the wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. They complained that the actions of the respondent police infringed their human rights by preventing that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.520122

Ostendorf v Germany: ECHR 7 Mar 2013

The applicant was registered on a German database as a person prepared to use violence in the context of sports events. He travelled with a group of others from Bremen to Frankfurt in order to attend a football match. They were kept under police surveillance. Some (not the applicant) were searched and found to be in possession of things associated with the perpetration of crowd violence. The applicant was arrested at a pub. He was taken to a police station close to the football stadium where he was detained until one hour after the match had ended. In all, he was under arrest and in detention for about four hours. He was not charged at any stage. The German courts rejected his complaints of unlawful arrest and detention.
Held: The arrest and detention were lawful pursuant to Article 5 (1)(b) but not in relation to Article 5(1)(c). It is with Article 5(1)(c) that we are concerned at this stage.
Under the second alternative of subparagraph (c) of Article 5 (1), the detention of a person may be justified ‘when it is reasonably considered necessary to prevent his committing an offence’. Article 5(1)(c) does not, thereby, permit a policy of general prevention directed against an individual or a category of individuals who are perceived by the authorities, rightly or wrongly, as being dangerous or having propensity to unlawful acts. That ground of detention does no more than afford the Contracting States a means of preventing a concrete and specific offence . .
Under the Court’s well established case law, detention to prevent a person from committing an offence must, in addition, be ‘effected for the purpose of bringing him before the competent legal authority’, a requirement which qualifies every category of detention referred to in Article 5(1)(c) (see Lawless v Ireland (No3) . . ).
Subparagraph (c) thus permits deprivation of liberty only in connection with criminal proceedings . . It governs pre-trial detention . . This is apparent from its wording, which must be read in conjunction both with subparagraph (a) and with paragraph 3, which form a whole with it . . Paragraph 3 of Article 5 states that everyone arrested or detained in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1(c) of Article 5 shall be brought promptly before a judge – in any of the circumstances contemplated by the provisions of that paragraph – and shall be entitled to a trial within a reasonable time . .
The Court . . recalls that under paragraphs 1(c) and 3 of Article 5, detention to prevent a person from committing an offence must, in addition, be ‘effected for the purpose of bringing him before the competent legal authority’ and that the person is ‘entitled to trial within a reasonable time’. Under its long established case law, the second alternative of Article 5 (1)(c) therefore only governs pre-trial detention and not custody for preventive purposes without the person concerned being suspected of having already committed a criminal offence . .
It is, however, clear that the aim of his detention was purely preventive from the outset. As noted above, it is indeed uncontested that the applicant in the present case was not suspected of having committed a criminal offence as his preparatory acts were not punishable under German law. His police custody only served the (preventive) purpose of ensuring that he would not commit offences in an imminent hooligan altercation. He was to be released once the risk of such an altercation had ceased to exist and his detention was thus not aimed at bringing him before a judge in the context of a pre-trial detention and at committing him to a criminal trial.
The Court notes that the Government advocated a revision of the Court’s case-law on the scope of Article 5 ss 1 (c) in this respect. It agrees with the Government that the wording of the second alternative of sub-paragraph (c) of Article 5 ss 1, in so far as it permits detention ‘when it is reasonably considered necessary to prevent his committing an offence’, would cover purely preventive police custody in order to avert imminent specific serious offences which is here at issue.
However, that interpretation could neither be reconciled with the entire wording of sub-paragraph (c) of Article 5 ss 1 nor with the system of protection set up by Article 5 as a whole. Sub-paragraph (c) of Article 5 ss 1 requires that the detention of the person concerned is ‘effected for the purpose of bringing him before the competent legal authority’ and under Article 5 ss 3 that person is ‘entitled to trial within a reasonable time’. As the Court has confirmed in its case-law on many occasions, the second alternative of Article 5 ss 1 (c) is consequently only covering deprivation of liberty in connection with criminal proceedings. In particular, contrary to the Government’s submission, the term ‘trial’ does not refer to a judicial decision on the lawfulness of the preventive police custody. Those proceedings are addressed in paragraph 4 of Article 5.
The Court further observes that, contrary to the Government’s view, the second alternative of Article 5 ss 1 cannot be considered as superfluous in addition to the first alternative of that provision (detention ‘on reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence’). A detention under sub-paragraph (c) of Article 5 ss 1 may be ordered, in particular, against a person having carried out punishable preparatory acts to an offence in order to prevent his committing that latter offence. That person may then be brought before a judge and be put on a criminal trial, for the purposes of Article 5 ss 3, in respect of the punishable preparatory acts to the offence.’

Judges:

Mark Villiger, P

Citations:

15598/08 – HEJUD, [2013] ECHR 197, 34 BHRC 738

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Hicks and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis CA 22-Jan-2014
The claimants said that the restrictive tactics used by the respondent when policing crowds at a royal wedding.
Held: The appeals failed. The police had reasonable grounds for suspecting that the claimants were likely to cause a breach of the . .
Not followed – Hicks and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis SC 15-Feb-2017
The claimants had wanted to make a peaceful anti-monarchist demonstration during the wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. They complained that the actions of the respondent police infringed their human rights by preventing that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.471518

Hicks and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis: Admn 18 Jul 2012

The claimants challnged the lawfulness of decisions made by the respondent as to the policing of events surrounding the Royal Wedding in April 2011.

Judges:

Richards LJ, Openshaw J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 1947 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Hicks and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis CA 22-Jan-2014
The claimants said that the restrictive tactics used by the respondent when policing crowds at a royal wedding.
Held: The appeals failed. The police had reasonable grounds for suspecting that the claimants were likely to cause a breach of the . .
At First Instance – Hicks and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis SC 15-Feb-2017
The claimants had wanted to make a peaceful anti-monarchist demonstration during the wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. They complained that the actions of the respondent police infringed their human rights by preventing that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.462952

Yarl’s Wood Immigration Ltd and others v Bedfordshire Police Authority: ComC 30 Sep 2008

The owners of the Yarslwood Immigration centre sought damages under the 1886 Act after a riot at the centre caused substantial damage.
Held: The claim failed: ‘The fact that YWIL and GSL [the appellants] were acting as public authorities exercising coercive powers of the state in carrying out its public function in respect of the Yarl’s Wood immigration detention centre does not per se put them outside the scope of the 1886 Act. However, the fact that they are entities with public law powers and duties for order within the detention centre means that, in respect of loss suffered from riot damage caused by detainees within the centre, they are not qualifying persons within the 1886 Act. The 1886 Act and its predecessors imposed a statutory duty to compensate on those responsible for law and order in a given area. The intention behind the legislation was that local property owners should be entitled to obtain compensation from the body with responsibility for protecting them from the risk of riot. It was not to enable a public authority with a particular responsibility for order within a defined area to seek compensation from another public authority with a broadly equivalent, but not identical, responsibility for order in that area.’
Rix LJ described the rationalisation of the liability of the hundred and now the police authority in these terms: ‘It seems to me that what Lord Mansfield had to say about that question, so much closer to the origin of the first Riot Act 1714, still retains pertinence, expressing as it does the common sense of the matter. It is for the sake of the party whose property has been damaged, it is to encourage the inhabitants (now the police force) of the locality, but including the party injured himself, all to assist in the preservation of the peace, it is to share the burden both of keeping the peace and of the misfortune of loss or injury. Moreover, as is so often the case with strict liability, it is because those who are liable to compensate are also regarded by the law as standing in the shoes of the wrongdoers themselves (as, for instance, in the case of the vicariously liable), in part because their obligation, their strict obligation, is to prevent what has happened happening.’

Judges:

Beatson J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2207 (Comm), [2009] 1 All ER 886, (2008) 158 NLJ 1415

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Riot (Damages) Act 1886

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Bedfordshire Police Authority v Constable and others ComC 20-Jun-2008
The authority insured its primary liability for compensation under the 1886 Act through the claimants and the excess of liability through re-insurers. The parties sought clarification from the court of the respective liabilities of the insurance . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Yarl’s Wood Immigration Ltd and Others v Bedfordshire Police Authority CA 23-Oct-2009
The claimant sought to recover the costs of damage to their centre following a riot, saying that under the 1886 Act, they were liable. It appealed against a ruling that they were unable to claim as a public authority, saying that the 1886 Act was . .
See Also – Bedfordshire Police Authority v Constable CA 12-Feb-2009
The police had responded to a riot at Yarlswood detention centre. They had insurance to cover their liability under the 1886 Act, but the re-insurers said that the insurance did not cover the event, saying that the liability was for statutory . .
Cited – The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime v Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co (Europe) Ltd and Others SC 20-Apr-2016
The Court considered the quantification of damages to be awarded to a business suffering under riots under the 1886 Act, and in particular whether such recoverable losses included compensation for consequential losses, including loss of profits and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Damages

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.276537

Malone v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis (No 2): ChD 28 Feb 1979

The court considered the lawfulness of telephone tapping. The issue arose following a trial in which the prosecution had admitted the interception of the plaintiff’s telephone conversations under a warrant issued by the Secretary of State. The plaintiff claimed that the interception had been and was unlawful.
Held: Although he dismissed the plaintiff’s claim, the Vice Chancellor said ‘Any regulation of so complex a matter as telephone tapping is essentially a matter for Parliament, not the courts . . this case seems to me to make it plain that telephone tapping is a subject which cries out for legislation.’
‘I am not unduly troubled by the absence of English authority: there has to be a first time for everything, and if the principles of English law, and not least analogies from the existing rules, together with the requirements of justice and common sense, pointed firmly to such a right existing, then I think the court should not be deterred from recognising the right. On the other hand, it is no function of the courts to legislate in a new field. The extension of the existing laws and principles is one thing, the creation of an altogether new right is another.’
‘I readily accept that if the question before me were one of construing a statute enacted with the purpose of giving effect to obligations imposed by the Convention, the court would readily seek to construe the legislation in a way that would effectuate the Convention rather than frustrate it. However, no relevant legislation of that sort is in existence. It seems to me that where Parliament has abstained from legislating on a point that is plainly suitable for legislation, it is indeed difficult for the court to lay down new rules of common law or equity that will carry out the Crown’s treaty obligations, or to discover for the first time that such rules have always existed.’

Judges:

Sir Robert Megarry VC

Citations:

[1979] CLY 2098, [1979] 1 Ch 344, [1980] QB 49, [1979] 2 All ER 620, [1979] EWHC 2 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Bonalumi v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 1985
In the course of extradition proceedings, an order was obtained under the 1879 Act. The defendant sought to appeal against the order, and applied to the Court of Appeal.
Held: The procedure under the 1879 Act was in the course of criminal . .
Cited – W, Regina v (Attorney General’s reference no 5 of 2002) CACD 12-Jun-2003
Three serving police officers provided confidential information to a known criminal. The Chief Constable authorised interception of telephones at a police station, a private network. The court accepted that section 17 prevented the defence asserting . .
Appeal from – Malone v The United Kingdom ECHR 2-Aug-1984
COURT (PLENARY) The complainant asserted that his telephone conversation had been tapped on the authority of a warrant signed by the Secretary of State, but that there was no system to supervise such warrants, and that it was not therefore in . .
Cited – Wainwright and another v Home Office HL 16-Oct-2003
The claimant and her son sought to visit her other son in Leeds Prison. He was suspected of involvement in drugs, and therefore she was subjected to strip searches. There was no statutory support for the search. The son’s penis had been touched . .
Cited – Costello v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary CA 22-Mar-2001
The police seized a car from Mr Costello, believing that it was stolen. The seizure was lawful at the time, by virtue of section 19 of PACE. The police never brought any criminal proceedings against Mr Costello, but they refused to return the car to . .
Cited – Tillery Valley Foods v Channel Four Television, Shine Limited ChD 18-May-2004
The claimant sought an injunction to restrain the defendants broadcasting a film, claiming that it contained confidential material. A journalist working undercover sought to reveal what he said were unhealthy practices in the claimant’s meat . .
Cited – Regina v P and others HL 19-Dec-2000
Where communications had been intercepted in a foreign country, and the manner of such interceptions had been lawful in that country, the evidence produced was admissible in evidence in a trial in England. An admission of such evidence was not an . .
See Also – Malone v The United Kingdom ECHR 26-Apr-1985
Hudoc Judgment (Just satisfaction) Struck out of the list (friendly settlement) . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police, Criminal Evidence

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.183549

Hart v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary: CA 24 Jun 2008

The claimant renewed her application for leave to appeal. She had been a probationary constable, but after various injuries came to suffer disability, preventing her being able to carry out the routine activities of as constable, and her employment had been terminated. The tribunal, having found her to be disabled, found also that the discrimination was in the particular circumstances justified under 3A(3), dismissing her suggestion that appropriate adjustments should have been made. The Tribunal found that having been unable to demonstrate the basic competencies of a police constable during her training she fell within the respondent force’s policy not to recruit those who could not meet those competencies, and that it would have been unreasonable to have expected the Force to waive its basic requirement.
Held: The application failed. Though the court had sympathy for the claimant, both the tribunal and EAT had been entitled to draw the distinction they had between a probationary officer and an officer who had served the probationary period and qualified as a police constable. The distinction came from the Regulations under which the respondent worked, and ‘one does not really get to section 18B despite the mandatory language of the section if the position is as I have indicated, namely that the chief constable was entitled (and was therefore justified) not to lower the standard in relation to probationary training.’ and ‘the Tribunal did not err in law when it held that the requirements of the regulations which necessitated training and experience in confrontational situations were what it described as an ‘irreducible minimum’ in the training of police constables and it was not therefore open to the respondent to make an adjustment which would have the effect of waiving the strict requirement under the regulations that an individual must be fit physically and mentally to perform the duties of a police constable.’

Judges:

Wall LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 929

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Disability Discrimination Act 1995 3A(3) 18B(1), Police Regulations 2003 12 13

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Hart v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary EAT 6-Dec-2007
EAT Disability discrimination – Reasonable adjustments
The Tribunal found that the Chief Constable was entitled to terminate the services of a probationary constable who could not successfully complete her . .
Cited – Archibald v Fife Council HL 1-Jul-2004
The claimant was employed as a street sweeper. She suffered injury to her health making it difficult to do her work. She was dismissed, and claimed that being disabled, the employer had not made reasonable adjustments to find alternative work for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination, Police

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.272229

Albert v Lavin: QBD 1980

The defendant (A) and the prosecutor (L), an off duty constable not in uniform, awaited a bus. A pushed past the queue, whose members objected. L stood in his way. A pushed past onto the step of the bus, turned, grabbed L’s lapel and made to hit him. L in self defence pulled A from the bus and away from the queue. A again tried to hit L, who said he would arrest him unless he stopped struggling, but A struck the constable several times and the constable arrested him for assaulting a constable in the execution of his duty. Before the justices, the defendant contended that L had not been acting in the execution of his duty. The magistrates convicted A because, given the reactions of the other members of the queue when the defendant pushed past, L had reasonably expected a breach of the peace to be about to take place and so he had been entitled to use reasonable force to prevent the breach of the peace.
Held: A constable could detain a man against his will without arresting him. The court addressed the question whether the defendant knew or should have known that L was a constable.
Hodgson J said: ‘It is however clear law that a police officer, reasonably believing that a breach of the peace is about to take place, is entitled to take such steps as are necessary to prevent it, including the reasonable use of force: King v Hodges [1974] Crim LR 424 and Piddington v Bates [1961] 1 WLR 162. If those steps include physical restraint of someone then that restraint is not an unlawful detention but a reasonable use of force. It is a question of fact and degree when a restraint has continued for so long that there must be either a release or an arrest, but on the facts found in this case it seems to me to be clear that that point had not been reached. Obviously where a constable is restraining someone to prevent a breach of the peace he must release (or arrest) him as soon as the restrained person no longer presents a danger to the peace. In this case the justices found that the defendant continued in breach of the peace up to the time when he assaulted the constable.’

Judges:

Hodgson J

Citations:

Unreported (1980)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – 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 . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – 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 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.

Police, Crime

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.247474

L, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Another: CA 1 Mar 2007

The court considered the proper content of an enhanced criminal record certificate. The claimant said that it should contain only matter relating to actual or potential criminal activity.
Held: As to the meaning of section 115: ‘if Parliament had intended to limit relevant information to information of criminal or potentially criminal activity, it would be likely to have said so. In other words ‘any’ means any.’ Parliament intended to alter the common law position (whether consciously or otherwise is irrelevant) because the common law presumption against disclosure of relevant information has been turned on its head. If the information is, in the opinion of the relevant Chief Officer of Police, relevant and ought to be disclosed, then the police are bound to disclose it. To restrict the information in the way suggested would merely give rise to dispute.

Judges:

Longmore LJ, Smith LJ, Moore-Bick LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 168, Times 28-Mar-2007, [2007] 4 All ER 128, [2008] 1 WLR 681

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police Act 1997 113 115, Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 4(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In re Groos Estate 1904
. .
Cited – Regina (X) v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police CA 30-Jul-2004
The claimant had been accused of offences, but the prosecution had been discontinued when the child victims had failed to identify him. The police had nevertheless notified potential employers and he had been unable to obtain work as a social . .
Cited – Ward v Holman 1964
Section 3 of the 1861 Act abrogated the common law rule that a change of domicile operated as a revocation of a testamentary disposition. The long title of the Act was ‘An Act to amend the law with respect to wills of personal estate made by British . .
Cited – Black-Clawson International Ltd v Papierwerke Waldhof Aschaffenburg AG HL 5-Mar-1975
Statute’s Mischief May be Inspected
The House considered limitations upon them in reading statements made in the Houses of Parliament when construing a statute.
Held: It is rare that a statute can be properly interpreted without knowing the legislative object. The courts may . .
Cited – Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2) HL 10-Jul-2003
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its . .
Cited – Black-Clawson International Ltd v Papierwerke Waldhof Aschaffenburg AG HL 5-Mar-1975
Statute’s Mischief May be Inspected
The House considered limitations upon them in reading statements made in the Houses of Parliament when construing a statute.
Held: It is rare that a statute can be properly interpreted without knowing the legislative object. The courts may . .
Cited – Countryside Alliance and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Attorney General Another, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs CA 23-Jun-2006
The claimants sought to challenge the validity of the 2004 Act under human rights law and on European law grounds. A variety of effects of the Act were alleged. It was said that it would prevent landowners enjoying their own land, and that the Act . .
Cited – Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart HL 26-Nov-1992
Reference to Parliamentary Papers behind Statute
The inspector sought to tax the benefits in kind received by teachers at a private school in having their children educated at the school for free. Having agreed this was a taxable emolument, it was argued as to whether the taxable benefit was the . .
Cited – Melluish (Inspector of Taxes) v BMI (No 3) Ltd and Related Appeals HL 16-Oct-1995
Chattels which became affixed to a lessee’s land became fixtures, and were not available for tax allowances calculations. Lord Browne-Wilkinson said: ‘The terms expressly or implicitly agreed between the fixer of the chattel and the owner of the . .
Cited – Begum (otherwise SB), Regina (on the Application of) v Denbigh High School HL 22-Mar-2006
The student, a Muslim wished to wear a full Islamic dress, the jilbab, but this was not consistent with the school’s uniform policy. She complained that this interfered with her right to express her religion.
Held: The school’s appeal . .
Cited – Regina v Chief Constable of North Wales Police and Others Ex Parte Thorpe and Another; Regina v Chief Constable for North Wales Police Area and others ex parte AB and CB CA 18-Mar-1998
Public Identification of Pedophiles by Police
AB and CB had been released from prison after serving sentences for sexual assaults on children. They were thought still to be dangerous. They moved about the country to escape identification, and came to be staying on a campsite. The police sought . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Pal QBD 3-Feb-2000
The prosecutor appealed from the magistrates’ acquittal of the defendant, who was of Asian origin, and who had assaulted the victim, also of Asian origin, calling him a ‘white man’s arse-licker’ and a ‘brown Englishman’.
Held: This did not . .
Cited – Regina v Local Authority and Police Authority in the Midlands ex parte LM 2000
The applicant owned a bus company whose contract with the local education authority for the provision of school bus services was terminated after the disclosure by the police and the social services department of a past investigation into an . .
Appeal from – L, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis Admn 19-Mar-2006
The court considered the duties on the respondent in providing an enhanced criminal record certificate. In one case, the claimant had brought up her son who was made subject to child protection procedures for neglect. Her job involved supervising . .

Cited by:

Cited – L, Regina (On the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis SC 29-Oct-2009
Rebalancing of Enhanced Disclosure Requirements
The Court was asked as to the practice of supplying enhanced criminal record certificates under the 1997 Act. It was said that the release of reports of suspicions was a disproportionate interference in the claimants article 8 rights to a private . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Police

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.249325

Regina v Nicol and Selvanayagam: QBD 10 Nov 1995

The appellants appealed a bind-over for a finding that each appellant had been guilty of conduct whereby a breach of the peace was likely to be occasioned. The appellants, concerned about cruelty to animals, had obstructed an angling competition by seeking to distract the fish and to dissuade the anglers from catching them. No violence was used or threatened, but in spite of police requests to desist the appellants continued until they were arrested.
Held: Simon Brown LJ said: ‘Before the court can properly find that the natural consequence of lawful conduct by a defendant would, if persisted in, be to provoke another to violence, it should, it seems to me, be satisfied that in all the circumstances it is the defendant who is acting unreasonably rather than the other person . . [A]s it seems to me, some clear interference at least with the rights . . of others is bound to characterise any conduct of which it can properly be said that it would naturally provoke violence in others. Putting it another way, the Court would surely not find a section 115 complaint proved if any violence likely to have been provoked on the part of others would be not merely unlawful but wholly unreasonable – as, of course, it would be if the defendant’s conduct was not merely lawful but such as in no material way interfered with the other’s rights. A fortiori if the defendant was properly exercising his own basic rights, whether of assembly, demonstration or free speech.’

Judges:

Simon Brown LJ, Scott Baker J

Citations:

[1996] Crim LR 318, [1995] Times LR 607, (1996) 160 JP 155

Statutes:

Magistrates Courts Act 1980 8115

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – 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 . .
Approved – Wise v Dunning KBD 1902
A protestant preacher in Liverpool was held to be liable to be bound over to keep the peace upon proof that he habitually accompanied his public speeches with behaviour calculated to insult Roman Catholics. His actions had caused, and were liable to . .

Cited by:

Cited – Redmond-Bate v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 23-Jul-1999
The police had arrested three peaceful but vociferous preachers when some members of a crowd gathered round them threatened hostility.
Held: Freedom of speech means nothing unless it includes the freedom to be irritating, contentious, . .
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 – 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. . .
Cited – Hashman and Harrup v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Nov-1999
The defendants had been required to enter into a recognisance to be of good behaviour after disrupting a hunt by blowing of a hunting horn. They were found to have unlawfully caused danger to the dogs. Though there had been no breach of the peace, . .
See Also – Selvanayagam v United Kingdom ECHR 12-Dec-2002
Any presumption of law which had operated against the applicant had been within reasonable limits, had taken account of the importance of what was at stake and had maintained the rights of the defence. . .
Cited – Wright v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis QBD 11-Sep-2013
The claimant sought damages for false imprisonment and infringement of his human rights in the manner of the defendant’s management of a demonstration in which he was involved. The issue was whether ilce action was justified on the basis that the . .
Appeal from – Nicol and Selvanayagam v United Kingdom ECHR 11-Jan-2001
(Admissibility) The applicants took part in an anti-fishing protest at an angling match on 28 May 1994. Their aim was to sabotage the match by throwing twigs in the water close to the anglers’ hooks so as to disturb the surface, while other . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Police

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.221600

Laporte, Regina (on the Application of) v Gloucestershire Constabulary and others: CA 8 Dec 2004

The claimant had been in a bus taking her and others to an intended demonstration. The police feared breaches of the peace, and stopped the bus, and ordered the driver to return to London, and escorted it to ensure it did not stop.
Held: The police were correct to anticipate a breach of the peace and were correct to stop the coach: ‘ . . . it is necessary to distinguish between arrest and preventive action short of arrest, including temporary detention. We regard what is sufficiently ‘imminent’ to justify taking action to prevent a breach of the peace as dependent on all the circumstances. . . What preventive action was necessary and proportionate, however, would be very much influenced by how close in proximity, both in place and time, the location of the apprehended breach of the peace was.’ However the police exceeded their powers in returning the passengers to London as virtual prisoners.

Judges:

Lord Justice Rix The Lord Chief Justice Of England &Amp; Wales Lord Justice Clarke

Citations:

[2005] QB 678, [2004] EWCA Civ 1639, Times 13-Dec-2004, [2005] All ER 473

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – 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 – Moss v McLachlan QBD 1985
Four striking miners were travelling in a convoy of motor vehicles and were stopped by a police cordon at a junction within several miles of four collieries. The inspector in charge believed with reason that a breach of the peace would be committed . .
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 – Duncan v Jones KBD 1936
The appellant was about to make a public address in a situation in which the year before a disturbance had been incited by her speaking. A policeman believed reasonably that a breach of the peace would occur if the meeting was held, and ordered the . .
Cited – 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 – 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 . .
Cited – Redmond-Bate v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 23-Jul-1999
The police had arrested three peaceful but vociferous preachers when some members of a crowd gathered round them threatened hostility.
Held: Freedom of speech means nothing unless it includes the freedom to be irritating, contentious, . .
Cited – Gillan and Quinton, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Another CA 29-Jul-2004
The appellants had challenged the lawfulness of being stopped and searched by police. The officers relied on an authorisation made under the 2000 Act. They had been on their way to attending an arms fair, intending to demonstrate.
Held: The . .

Cited by:

Cited – Austin and Saxby v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis QBD 23-Mar-2005
Towards the end of a substantial May Day demonstration on the streets of London, police surrounded about 3,000 people in Oxford Circus and did not allow them to leave for seven hours. The claimant who was present, but not involved in any of the . .
Cited – Singh and others v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police QBD 4-Nov-2005
A play was presented which was seen by many Sikhs as offensive. Protesters were eventually ordered to disperse under s30 of the 2003 Act. The defendants appealed their convictions for having breached that order, saying that it interfered with their . .
Cited – Singh, Regina (on the Application of) v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police CA 28-Jul-2006
Sikh protesters set out to picket a theatre production which they considered to offend their religion. The respondent used a existing ASBO dispersal order which had been obtained for other purposes, to control the demonstration.
Held: The . .
Appeal From – 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.

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.220108

Jecius v Lithuania: ECHR 31 Jul 2000

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (six month period); Violation of Art. 5-1 as regards the applicant
The applicant complained of violation of his article 5 rights in successive periods of detention. The first period of five weeks was under a broad provision of the criminal code which permitted preventive detention in connection with banditry, criminal association or terrorising a person. During that period no investigation was carried out and no charge was made.
Held: Preventive detention of the kind found was not permitted by article 5.1(c). A person may be detained under that clause only ‘in the context of criminal proceedings’ for the purpose of bringing him before the competent legal authority ‘on suspicion of his having committed an offence’

Judges:

J-P Costa P

Citations:

34578/97, [2000] ECHR 404, (2002) 35 EHRR 16

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Faulkner, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another SC 1-May-2013
The applicants had each been given a life sentence, but having served the minimum term had been due to have the continued detention reviewed to establish whether or not continued detention was necessary for the protection of the pblic. It had not . .
Incomplete – Hicks and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis CA 22-Jan-2014
The claimants said that the restrictive tactics used by the respondent when policing crowds at a royal wedding.
Held: The appeals failed. The police had reasonable grounds for suspecting that the claimants were likely to cause a breach of the . .
Incomplete – Hicks and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis SC 15-Feb-2017
The claimants had wanted to make a peaceful anti-monarchist demonstration during the wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. They complained that the actions of the respondent police infringed their human rights by preventing that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.165921

National Council for Civil Liberties (Liberty), Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another: Admn 29 Jul 2019

Second challenge to the 2016 Act seeking a declaration of incompatibility of ‘bulk’ powers.

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 2057 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Investigatory Powers Act 2016

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.640133

Commissioner of Police for The City of London, Regina (on The Application of) v City of London Magistrates’ Court and Another: Admn 29 Apr 2015

The Commissioner sought judicial review (with permission) of an order made by Magistrates in effect that the police should release cash, which was the subject of a forfeiture application under section 298 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, to the interested party to fund his criminal defence. Because the forfeiture proceedings were outstanding such an order is said to be prohibited by section 298(4) of the 2002 Act and thus beyond the magistrates’ jurisdiction.

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 1656 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police

Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.549399

LM v Minister for Justice and Equality: ECJ 25 Jul 2018

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Urgent preliminary ruling procedure – Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters – European arrest warrant – Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA – Article 1(3) – Surrender procedures between Member States – Conditions for execution – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 47 – Right of access to an independent and impartial tribunal

Citations:

[2018] EUECJ C-216/18PPU, [2018] WLR(D) 515, ECLI:EU:C:2018:586

Links:

WLRD, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Wightman and Others v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union ECJ 10-Dec-2018
Art 50 Notice withrawable unilaterally
Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 50 TEU – Notification by a Member State of its intention to withdraw from the European Union – Consequences of the notification – Right of unilateral revocation of the notification – Conditions
The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.631176

OOO and Others v The Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis: QBD 20 May 2011

The several claimants had been brought to the UK as children, but then taken into effective slavery in households here. They had reported their treatment to the police, and now sought damages saying that the police had failed to make appropriate investigations and protect them from further inhuman and degrading treatment.

Judges:

Wyn Williams J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 1246 (QB), [2011] HRLR 29, [2011] UKHRR 767

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.440089

Gillan and Quinton v The United Kingdom: ECHR 10 Jun 2008

The court set the questions to be answered later in response to the complaint as to the use of stop and search powers by the British police.

Citations:

4158/05, [2008] ECHR 521

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 5 8 10, Terrorism Act 2000 44

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

At First Instance – Gillan and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis and Another Admn 31-Oct-2003
The applicants challenged by way of judicial review the way they had been stopped and searched under the Act. They attended a demonstration. The search revealed nothing suspicious. General authorisations for such searches had been issued under the . .
At Court of Appeal – Gillan and Quinton, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Another CA 29-Jul-2004
The appellants had challenged the lawfulness of being stopped and searched by police. The officers relied on an authorisation made under the 2000 Act. They had been on their way to attending an arms fair, intending to demonstrate.
Held: The . .
At House of Lords – Gillan, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Another HL 8-Mar-2006
The defendants said that the stop and search powers granted under the 2000 Act were too wide, and infringed their human rights. Each had been stopped when innocently attending demonstrations in London, and had been effectively detained for about . .

Cited by:

Question Set – Gillan and Quinton v The United Kingdom ECHR 12-May-2009
(Admissibility and Summary) . .
Question Set – Gillan and Quinton v The United Kingdom ECHR 12-Jan-2010
The claimants had been stopped by the police using powers in the 2000 Act. They were going to a demonstration outside an arms convention. There was no reason given for any suspicion that the searches were needed.
Held: The powers given to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.270099

Reynolds, Regina (on the Application of) v Sussex Police and Another: Admn 16 May 2008

The complainant’s brother had been arrested for being drunk. After a time in a cell, he was found unwell and fell into a coma. Complaints were made of his treatment. The Police Complaints Commission was to investigate the events after the arrest independently, but the Sussex police wanted to investigate the matters before the arrest. The claimant wanted the entire investigation to be by the Commission.
Held: The Commission did have jurisdiction to investigate matters before the arrest, but it may be practical and proper to engage the local force to carry out that investigation. Such an extended investigation may in any event be required to satisfy the human rights obligations of the defendants.

Judges:

Collins J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1240 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police Reform Act 2002 10, Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Secretary of State for Defence v Al-Skeini and others (The Redress Trust Intervening) HL 13-Jun-2007
Complaints were made as to the deaths of six Iraqi civilians which were the result of actions by a member or members of the British armed forces in Basra. One of them, Mr Baha Mousa, had died as a result of severe maltreatment in a prison occupied . .
Cited – Stephen Jordan (No 2) v The United Kingdom ECHR 10-Dec-2002
The applicant was a soldier who had been court marshalled for misuse of travel warrants. He wished to use in his defence his recent epilepsy. There was some delay while medical reports were obtained, and subsequently when the new legal system was . .
Cited – Amin, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Oct-2003
Prisoner’s death – need for full public enquiry
The deceased had been a young Asian prisoner. He was placed in a cell overnight with a prisoner known to be racist, extremely violent and mentally unstable. He was killed. The family sought an inquiry into the death.
Held: There had been a . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Reynolds, Regina (on the Application of) v Independent Police Complaints Commission and Another CA 22-Oct-2008
The court was asked to consider whether the IPCC could investigate the circumstances leading to the arrest of a suspect who fell into a coma after being arrested for being drunk. The IPCC appealed, saying that it did not have jurisdiction to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.270063

Dennis, Regina (on the Application of) v Independent Police Complaints Commission: Admn 6 May 2008

The claimant was stood at her door when she was taken by police officers, an armed gun pointed at her, laid on the ground and her hands bound. She was held for fifteen minutes. She was entirely innocent, but the officers were looking for armed suspects. She complained that the defendant had not dealt with her complaint properly in finding no officer at fault.
Held: The power contained in section 3 of the 1967 Act included a power to use force to remove an innocent third party from the scene of a potentially violent arrest where guns might be fired, and also to search her under section 47 of the 1968 Act. However the caseworker had fundamentally misconstrued the basis on which the claimant was kept in that condition.
As to whether the PCA had a power to re-open a decision: ‘Much may depend on the type of decision it is sought to change and the effect that such a change has on the rights of the parties. While not wishing to express any concluded view as to the power to change a decision on dispensing with an investigation, I am satisfied that where an appeal decision had been made and promulgated, there is no power to vary it by reason of further representations. To rule in any other way would lead to uncertainty.’

Judges:

Saunders J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1158 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police Reform Act 2002, Criminal Law Act 1967 3(1), Firearms Act 1968 47

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Police Complaints Authority ex parte Hanratty 25-Jul-1995
The court was asked whether the Police Complaints Authority had a power to re-open its own decision. Brooke J said: ‘Each of these cases turns on the particular statutory background . . (I leave open for another day) the question whether in any . .
Cited – Wilkinson, Regina (on the Application of) v Police Complaints Authority and others Admn 19-Mar-2004
A complaint was to be investigated by the Merseyside Police. They obtained permission from the Police Complaints Authority to dispense with the investigation when the complainant had gone missing and therefore the complaint could not be . .

Cited by:

Cited – Coker, Regina (on The Application of) v Independent Police Complaints Commission QBD 16-Nov-2010
The claimant sought judicial review of a decision made by the respondents on her complaint, which was that no misconduct proceedings had been brought. Her brother had been arrested and died in custody. The Commission had recommended such . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police

Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.268714

Clark v The Chief Constable of Essex Police: QBD 18 Sep 2006

The officer had retired on ill health grounds, and now sought damages from his chief constable saying that the duties imposed on him had been excessive, and had caused his injury by negligence, and that he had been bullied by co-workers and had not been given appropriate support by the defendant.
Held: The allegations of bullying and harassment were made out. A meeting described as a management meeting was in fact clearly a disciplinary one, but proper procedures had not been followed. This level of stress was not properly part of a policeman’s role and the psychological injury followed. The claim of contributory negligence was not supported. The claimant had done what he could to complain of his treatment. Damages were awarded accordingly.

Judges:

Tugendhat J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2290 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Waters v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis HL 27-Jul-2000
A policewoman, having made a complaint of serious sexual assault against a fellow officer complained again that the Commissioner had failed to protect her against retaliatory assaults. Her claim was struck out, but restored on appeal.
Held: . .
Cited – Sutherland v Hatton; Barber v Somerset County Council and similar CA 5-Feb-2002
Defendant employers appealed findings of liability for personal injuries consisting of an employee’s psychiatric illness caused by stress at work.
Held: Employers have a duty to take reasonable care for the safety of their employees. There are . .
Cited – Garrett v Camden London Borough Council CA 16-Mar-2001
The court considered a claim for work related stress. The claimant asserted that he had been harassed, intimidated and systematically undermined: ‘Many, alas, suffer breakdowns and depressive illnesses and a significant proportion could doubtless . .
Cited – Rorrison v West Lothian College and Lothian Regional Council OHCS 21-Jul-1999
The pursuer, a nurse, claimed that she suffered psychological injuries as a result of her treatment at work by two superiors.
Held: The court could find nothing in the pleadings: ‘which, if proved, could establish that Andrews and Henning . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Police, Vicarious Liability

Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.245094

Paul v Chief Constable of Humberside Police: CA 17 Mar 2004

Judges:

Mr Justice Brooke Lord Justice Chadwick Lord Justice Kay

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 308

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Police

Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.194580

Marcel v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: CA 1992

A writ of subpoena ad duces tecum had been issued requiring the production by the police for use in civil proceedings of documents seized during a criminal fraud investigation. The victim of the fraud needed them to pursue his own civil case.
Held: The court discharged the injunction granted at first instance and held that the police were obliged to comply with a subpoena which could only be resisted on grounds which would have been available to the true owner of the documents.
The statutory powers given to the police are coupled with a public law duty. The precise extent of the duty is difficult to define in general terms beyond saying that the powers must be exercised only in the public interest and with due regard to the rights of individuals. In the context of the seizure and retention of documents, the public law duty is combined with a private law duty of confidentiality towards the owner of the documents.
Dillon LJ said: ‘Even where a subpoena has been served, the police should not disclose the seized documents to the advisers of a party to civil proceedings in advance of the attendance at court required by the subpoena, unless at the least the police have first given to the true owner of the documents notice of the service of the subpoena and of the wish of the police to produce the documents in advance of the attendance at court required by the subpoena, and have given the true owner a reasonable opportunity to state his objections, if any, to that course.’ and ‘The responsibilities which are by law and custom entrusted to the police are wide and varied. The powers conferred upon them must be considered against the background of those responsibilities. If the hands of the police were too strictly tied with regard to the use of documents and information acquired under compulsory powers then the public interest would suffer . . The statutory powers given to the police are plainly coupled with a public law duty. The precise extent of that duty is, I think, difficult to define in general terms beyond saying that the powers must be exercised only in the public interest and with due regard to the rights of individuals.’
Sir Nicolas Browne-Wilkinson VC at first instance had said that section 22 referred to the duration of retention, not to its purpose: ‘However, there manifestly must be some limitation on the purposes for which seized documents can be used. Search and seizure under statutory powers constitute fundamental infringements of the individual’s immunity from interference by the state with his property and privacy – fundamental human rights. Where there is a public interest which requires some impairment of those rights, Parliament legislates to permit such impairment. But, in the absence of clear words, in my judgment Parliament cannot be assumed to have legislated so as to interfere with the basic rights of the individual to a greater extent than is necessary to secure the protection of that public interest. In the case of this Act, it is plainly necessary to trench upon the individual’s right to his property and privacy for the purpose of permitting the police to investigate and prosecute crime; hence the powers conferred by Part II of the Act. But in my judgment Parliament should not be taken to have authorised use of seized documents for any purpose the police think fit. For example, could the police provide copies of seized documents to the Press save in cases where publicity is necessary for the pursuit of their criminal investigations? . . In my judgment, subject to any express statutory provision in other Acts, the police are authorised to seize, retain and use documents only for public purposes related to the investigation and prosecution of crime and the return of stolen property to the true owner. Those investigations and prosecutions will normally be by the police themselves and involve no communication of documents or information to others. However, if communication to others is necessary for the purpose of the police investigation and prosecution, it is authorised. It may also be, though I do not decide, that there are other public authorities to which documents can properly be disclosed, for example to City and other regulatory authorities or to the security services. But in my judgment the powers to seize and retain are conferred for the better performance of public functions by public bodies and cannot be used to make information available to private individuals for their private purposes.’
Sir Christopher Slade said: ‘In my judgment, documents seized by a public authority from a private citizen in exercise of a statutory power can properly be used only for those purposes for which the relevant legislation contemplated that they might be used . . As a starting point, therefore, it is necessary to consider the purposes for which Parliament contemplated that documents seized under the powers conferred by Part II of the Act of 1984 might properly be used by the police. In my judgment, those purposes must be co-terminous with the purposes for which it envisaged that such documents might properly be retained by the police. The Vice Chancellor, ante, p.234B, stated that ‘Section 22 is dealing with the duration not the purpose of retention.’ I do not, for my part, read the scope of section 22 as being so limited as this. Not only does section 22(2) specify certain stated purposes for which anything seized for the purposes of a criminal investigation may be retained, but the subsection is prefaced by the words ‘Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1) above.’ These prefacing words presuppose that subsection (1) has itself specified, albeit in general terms, the purposes for which documents seized by virtue of section 19 or 20 may be retained. Accordingly, it seems to me, they presuppose that the phrase in subsection (1), ‘so long as is necessary in all the circumstances,’ has specified in general terms not only the duration but also the purposes for which retention of seized documents may continue.’
What then is the meaning of the phrase in section 22(1), ‘so long as is necessary in all the circumstances?’ In my judgment, in its context, this phrase can only mean: so long as is necessary for carrying out the purposes for which the powers given by sections 19 and 20 have been conferred. I shall not attempt a comprehensive statement of those purposes. They clearly include inter alia the primary purposes of investigating and prosecuting crime and the return to the true owner of property believed to have been obtained in consequence of the commission of an offence. Further, the relevant sections would, I think, authorise acts which were reasonably incidental to the pursuit of those primary purposes, thus including in appropriate circumstances the disclosure to third parties of seized documents.’

Judges:

Nolan LJ, Dillon LJ, Sir Christopher Slade

Citations:

[1992] Ch 225, [1992] 1 All ER 72

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 22

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (on the Application of Ellis) v The Chief Constable of Essex Police Admn 12-Jun-2003
An officer proposed to print the face of a convicted burglar on posters to be displayed in the town. The court considered the proposal. The probation service objected that the result would be to make it more difficult for him to avoid criminality on . .
Cited – Hellewell v Chief Constable of Derbyshire QBD 13-Jan-1995
The police were asked by shopkeepers concerned about shoplifting, for photographs of thieves so that the staff would recognise them. The police provided photographs including one of the claimant taken in custody. The traders were told only to show . .
Cited – Preston Borough Council v McGrath CA 12-May-2000
The defendant had been investigated for fraud against the claimant. He had disclosed documents to the police, but now complained at their use in the civil proceedings against him.
Held: The document had not been given to the police under . .
Cited – Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd, (Regina on the Application of ) v Serious Fraud Office and Another Admn 17-Dec-2003
The claimant sought judicial review of the decision of the respondent to disclose documents obtained by it from them during an investigation.
Held: The decisions to disclose material to the DoH were ‘in accordance with law’ within the meaning . .
Cited – Regina (Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd) v Serious Fraud Office CA 11-Nov-2004
In 2002 the SFO was investigating allegations that drug companies were selling generic drugs, including penicillin-based antibiotics and warfarin, to the National Health Service at artificially sustained prices. To further the investigation the SFO . .
Cited – Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd and others QBD 5-Mar-2009
The claimant police officer complained of an alleged defamation in an article published by the defendant. The defendant wished to obtain information from the IPCC to show that they were investigating the matter as a credible issue. The court . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Phillips v Newsgroup Newspapers Ltd and Others ChD 17-Nov-2010
The claimant had been assistant to a well known publicist. The defendant had settled an action brought by her principal for hacking his mobile telephone, in the course of which it appeared that the claimant’s phone had also been hacked. She now . .
Cited – Merseyside Police v Owens Admn 31-May-2012
The police had refused to returns items seized from Mr Owens on the basis that to do so would indirectly encourage and assist him in suspected criminal activity. CCTV footage had been removed from him to attempt identify an arsonist of a house.The . .
Cited – Re Arrows Ltd No 4 HL 1995
The Court of Appeal had allowed an appeal from the judge who had directed that the transcripts of examinations of a director of an insolvent company under section 236 on the Director of the Serious Fraud Office undertaking that the transcripts would . .
Cited – Ingenious Media Holdings Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs SC 19-Oct-2016
The tax payer complained that the Permanent Secretary for Tax had, in an off the record briefing disclosed tax details regarding a film investment scheme. Despite the off the record basis, details were published in a newspaper. His claims had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Intellectual Property, Human Rights

Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.183559

LXD and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police: Admn 28 Mar 2019

Challenge to failure of the defendant to provide accommodation to claimant’s who were under physical threats from third parties.

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 1120 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – LXD and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Merseyside Police Admn 17-May-2019
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.639684

Percy, Regina (on the Application of) v Corby Magistrates’ Court: Admn 7 Feb 2008

The claimant sought judicial review of a decision of the magistrates not to issue summonses against two police officers. She had been demonstrating near a US base, but had refused to intervene and allowed a US officer to unlawfully arrest and detain and assault her.
Held: Applying Klahn and Latham, there was clear evidence to justify the issue of a summons: ‘the conduct of the Northampton Magistrates’ Court is open to serious criticism. ‘

Judges:

Moses LJ, Ouseley J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 607 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

Citing:

Cited – Regina v West London Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Klahn QBD 1979
The issue of a summons by a magistrate is a judicial act: ‘The duty of a magistrate in considering an application for the issue of a summons is to exercise a judicial discretion in deciding whether or not to issue a summons. It would appear that he . .
Cited – Latham v Northampton Magistrates’ Court Admn 6-Feb-2008
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Police, Magistrates

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.266875

Regina (ex parte UMBS Online Ltd) v Serious Organised Crime Agency: Admn 2007

The customers bank accounts had been frozen at the request of the respondent agency after the bank had reported what it thought was suspicious activity to the Agency. It sought judicial review of the agency’s refusal to allow the bank to resume operation of the mandate.
Held: The request for judicial review was refused.

Judges:

Lloyd Jones J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1098 (Admin)

Statutes:

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 328

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – UMBS Online Ltd, Regina (on the Application Of) v Serious Organised Crime Agency and Another CA 2-May-2007
The bank had reported to the respondent its suspicions about funds it held for the claimant. The accounts were frozen, and the customer now sought a judicial review of the refusal of the Agency to reconsider its decision.
Held: The review was . .
Appeal from – UMBS Online, Regina (on the Application Of) v Serious Organised Crime Agency CA 21-Mar-2007
Application for leave to appeal against refusal of leave to bring judicial review of a decision of the respondent agency. Leave to appeal was granted, but the matter was returned to the administrative court for review. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Police

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.253652

N v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police: QBD 29 Nov 2006

The claimant was raped and assaulted by a police officer. She sought damages from the Chief Constable saying he was vicariously liable, saying that the rapist had been wearing his uniform though in fact off duty.

Judges:

Nelson J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 3041 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police Act 1996 88(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other, Vicarious Liability, Police

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.247983

LXD and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Merseyside Police: Admn 17 May 2019

Judges:

Freedman J

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 1264 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – LXD and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police Admn 28-Mar-2019
Challenge to failure of the defendant to provide accommodation to claimant’s who were under physical threats from third parties. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.639686

In re Officer L: HL 31 Jul 2007

Police officers appealed against refusal of orders protecting their anonymity when called to appear before the Robert Hamill Inquiry.
Held: ‘The tribunal accordingly approached the matter properly under article 2 in seeking to ascertain whether giving evidence would give rise to a materially increased risk to life. Having found that it did not, it did not require then to go on to consider whether such an increased risk, if found to exist, would come up to the threshold required of a real and immediate risk to life.’ and ‘the exercise to be carried out by the tribunal faced with a request for anonymity should be the application of the common law test, with an excursion, if the facts require it, into the territory of article 2. Such an excursion would only be necessary if the tribunal found that, viewed objectively, a risk to the witness’s life would be created or materially increased if they gave evidence without anonymity. If so, it should decide whether that increased risk would amount to a real and immediate risk to life. If it would, then the tribunal would ordinarily have little difficulty in determining that it would be reasonable in all the circumstances to give the witnesses a degree of anonymity.’

Judges:

Lord Hoffmann, Lord Woolf, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, Lord Mance

Citations:

[2007] UKHL 36, Times 01-Aug-2007, [2007] 1 WLR 2135, [2007] 4 All ER 965, 151 Sol Jo 1061, [2007] All ER (D) 484

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 2

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

Appeal from – Officer L, Re Application for Judicial Review CANI 5-Feb-2007
Police officers were to give evidence before the Hamill Inquiry into events in Northern Ireland, but feared that if they were assiociated through the inquiry with the events, they would be under a threat of terrorist reprisal. They therefore sought . .
Cited – Bennett v Officers A and B and Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis CA 2-Nov-2004
Police Officers had been involved in a shooting in which a man died. They were granted anonymity before the coroner’s court, on evidence suggesting they might be at risk. The family of the deceased appealed.
Held: The coroner misdirected . .
Cited – W, Re an Application for Judicial Review QBNI 27-Oct-2004
The court considered what was meant by the phrase ‘a real risk’: ‘a real risk is one that is objectively verified and an immediate risk is one that is present and continuing.’ . .
Cited – Regina (A and others) (Widgery Soldiers) v Lord Saville of Newdigate and Others CA 19-Dec-2001
The court would apply common sense in deciding whether soldier witnesses should be obliged to attend in person at an enquiry in Londonderry, where they claimed their lives would be at risk. It was not appropriate to seek to define what would be . .
Cited – Donaghy, Re Application for Judicial Review 25(1) CANI 8-May-2002
. .
Cited – Donaghy, Re Application for Judicial Review 25(2) CANI 8-May-2002
. .
Cited – Donaghy, Re Application for Judicial Review 25(3) CANI 8-May-2002
. .
Cited – Meehan, Re Application for Judicial Review CANI 26-Sep-2003
. .
Cited – Regina v Reigate Justices ex parte Argus Newspapers and Larcombe 1983
The court considered an application by the defendant, a ‘supergrass’ for his trial to be held in camera.
Held: Such an order was possible but should only be made if it was the only way of protecting the defendant. . .
At first Instance – Officer L and Others, Re Application for Judicial Review QBNI 3-Nov-2006
Police officers called to appear at a public inquiry objected to a decision against allowing them to do so anonymously. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Hertfordshire Police v Van Colle; Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police HL 30-Jul-2008
Police Obligations to Witnesses is Limited
A prosecution witness was murdered by the accused shortly before his trial. The parents of the deceased alleged that the failure of the police to protect their son was a breach of article 2.
Held: The House was asked ‘If the police are alerted . .
Cited – Regina v Davis HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant had been tried for the murder of two men by shooting them at a party. He was identified as the murderer by three witnesses who had been permitted to give evidence anonymously, from behind screens, because they had refused, out of fear, . .
Cited – Haddock v MGN Ltd and others ChNI 17-Oct-2008
Application for injunction to prevent the defendant newspapers and television companies from publishing the plaintiff’s picture in the course of a forthcoming civil action. He was coming toward the end of a long term of imprisonment. Whilst on . .
Cited – Times Newspapers Ltd and others v Regina and others CMAC 24-Oct-2008
Anonymity not to be by secret trial
The newspaper appealed against an order for the defendant soldiers’ trial to be held in camera.
Held: Section 94(2) could not be used to provide anonymity. The court relied on its common law powers under which: ‘for us to be entitled to make . .
Cited – Re E (A Child); E v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and Another (Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and others intervening) HL 12-Nov-2008
(Northern Ireland) Children had been taken to school in the face of vehement protests from Loyalists. The parents complained that the police had failed to protect them properly, since the behaviour was so bad as to amount to inhuman or degrading . .
Cited – Savage v South Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (MIND intervening) HL 10-Dec-2008
The deceased had committed suicide on escaping from a mental hospital. The Trust appealed against a refusal to strike out the claim that that they had been negligent in having inadequate security.
Held: The Trust’s appeal failed. The fact that . .
Cited – Times Newspapers Ltd and others v Soldier B CACD 24-Oct-2008
(Court’s Martial Appeal Court) The newspaper appealed against an order under section 94 of the 1955 Act restricting the identification of the defendants. The judge had said there would be a threat to both the safety of the defendants and as to the . .
Cited – Q, Regina (on The Application of) v Q Constabulary and Another Admn 17-Mar-2011
The claimant renewed his request for an order against the defendant that he should be given a place on a witness protection scheme. He had given evidence for the prosecution in a gangland murder trial. A risk assessment had identified a risk ‘real . .
Cited – Equality and Human Rights Commission v Prime Minister and Others Admn 3-Oct-2011
The defendant had published a set of guidelines for intelligence officers called upon to detain and interrogate suspects. The defendant said that the guidelines could only be tested against individual real life cases, and that the court should not . .
Cited – Associated Newspapers Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Rt Hon Lord Justice Leveson Admn 20-Jan-2012
The defendant was conducting a public enquiry into the culture, ethics and practices of national newspapers. The claimant and others objected to the admission of anonymous evidence from journalists afraid of career blight. The claimants complained . .
Cited – Rabone and Another v Pennine Care NHS Foundation SC 8-Feb-2012
The claimant’s daughter had committed suicide whilst on home leave from a hospital where she had stayed as a voluntary patient with depression. Her admission had followed a suicide attempt. The hospital admitted negligence but denied that it owed . .
Cited – Kent County Council, Regina (on The Application of) v HM Coroner for The County of Kent (North-West District) and Others Admn 15-Oct-2012
The council sought review of the coroner’s decision that the inquest would be an article 2 inquest and with a jury. The deceased was 14 years old and had taken methadone. In the months before his death, he had had involvement with the council’s . .
Cited – H v A (No2) FD 17-Sep-2015
The court had previously published and then withdrawn its judgment after third parties had been able to identify those involved by pulling together media and internet reports with the judgment.
Held: The judgment case should be published in . .
Cited – H v A (No2) FD 17-Sep-2015
The court had previously published and then withdrawn its judgment after third parties had been able to identify those involved by pulling together media and internet reports with the judgment.
Held: The judgment case should be published in . .
Cited – XXX v Camden London Borough Council CA 11-Nov-2020
Anonymity in Court Proceedings – No two stage test
XXX appealed against the refusal to make orders anonymising her name and redacting certain details from published judgments. The appeal raised a point about the proper approach to applications for anonymisation under CPR 39.2. She brought . .
Cited – Imam, Regina (on The Application of) v The London Borough of Croydon (Anonymity request) Admn 26-Mar-2021
Anonymity Not Necessary under CPR 3.92.
Judgment on the Claimant’s application for an order under CPR 39.2(4) that her name be anonymised in these proceedings by the use of a cipher and that restrictions should be imposed on the reporting of her identity. She said that publication of her . .
Cited – Lu v Solicitors Regulation Authority Admn 6-Jul-2022
No Unmnecessary Anoniymity
The appellant, having been acquitted of misconduct, complained of the anonymisation of various partied by the SDT.
Held: The court was critical of the approach taken by the Tribunal. ‘I see no good reason why Ms Pearson, Ms Stone, Mr Ewing and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Media, Human Rights

Leading Case

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.258518

Officer L, Re Application for Judicial Review: CANI 5 Feb 2007

Police officers were to give evidence before the Hamill Inquiry into events in Northern Ireland, but feared that if they were assiociated through the inquiry with the events, they would be under a threat of terrorist reprisal. They therefore sought anonymity. The tribunal now appealed the grant of anonymity.
Held: The appeal was refused. It confined its consideration to the tribunal’s ruling in relation to article 2 of the Convention. It held that the tribunal was in error in holding that it was necessary to find that a materially increased risk to the applicants for anonymity would arise from their giving evidence.

Judges:

Kerr LCJ, Campbell and Girvan LJJ

Citations:

[2007] NICA 8

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 2

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

Appeal from – Officer L and Others, Re Application for Judicial Review QBNI 3-Nov-2006
Police officers called to appear at a public inquiry objected to a decision against allowing them to do so anonymously. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – In re Officer L HL 31-Jul-2007
Police officers appealed against refusal of orders protecting their anonymity when called to appear before the Robert Hamill Inquiry.
Held: ‘The tribunal accordingly approached the matter properly under article 2 in seeking to ascertain . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Police, Human Rights

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.249047

Ruddy v Rae, Chief Constable Strathclyde Police and Another: SCS 2 Mar 2011

The pursuer had been arrested under warrant. He complained that other officers in Strathclyde assualted him when iin custody. That complaint was rejected after investigation, and proceedings were refused either by way of criminal prosecution or disciplinary proceedings. He made a civil complaint saying that he had been denied his human right and that there had been no effective investigation. He now appealed against rejection of that complaint.
Held: The claim was incompetent.
Lord Clarke said: ‘Any practitioner in the business of civil litigation might, when faced with this omnibus approach to several claims in a single action, query the appropriateness of this approach. He or she might reflect that in a single sheriff court action a straightforward claim for damages for assault finds itself coupled with (a) a claim for breach of the substantive obligation under article 3 of the Convention and (b) claims against two defenders ‘severally’ for breaches of the obligation arising under the article as regards investigation and inquiry. One action is being brought against two separate defenders with three distinctive juristic bases of claim being made.’

Judges:

Lord Clarke (Opinion)

Citations:

[2011] ScotCS CSIH – 16, 2011 Rep LR 62, 2011 SLT 387, 2011 GWD 9-209, [2011] CSIH 16

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Roghts 3

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Appeal from – Ruddy v Chief Constable, Strathclyde Police and Another SC 28-Nov-2012
The pursuer said that he had been assaulted whilst in the custody of the responder’s officers. He began civil actions after his complaint was rejected. He repeated the allegation of the assault, and complained also as to the conduct of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.430272

Fay v Chief Constable of Bedfordshire: CA 10 Dec 2003

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1770

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Fay v Chief Constable of Bedfordshire Police QBD 6-Feb-2003
The claimant had begun proceedings for the return of money held by the respondent. His action was stayed for inactivity, and the respondent later had the claim struck out on the basis that it would be an abuse of process to proceed.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.189050

Just for Kids Law, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 8 Jul 2019

The claimant organisation challenged the procedures applying to protect children when used as covert intelligence sources.

Judges:

Supperstone J

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 1772 (Admin), [2019] WLR(D) 386

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Human Rights, Children, Police

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.639696

Vicario v the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis: CA 21 Dec 2007

The claimant said that the police in deciding not to prosecute the person she said had abused her as a child, had breached a duty of care to her. A prosecution would have allowed her to come to terms with her distress.
Held: The defendant’s appeal against a refusal of a strike out of the claim succeeded. Novel categories of negligence should be extended only incrementally, and it must also therefore be particularly difficult to establish a duty of care which was close to a situation in which a duty of care had already been found not to exist. Nor in this case had the claimant brought sufficient proof that a prosecution would have the effect she predicted.

Citations:

Times 04-Jan-2008, [2007] EWCA Civ 1361

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire HL 28-Apr-1987
No General ty of Care Owed by Police
The mother of a victim of the Yorkshire Ripper claimed in negligence against the police alleging that they had failed to satisfy their duty to exercise all reasonable care and skill to apprehend the perpetrator of the murders and to protect members . .
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 – Brooks v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and others HL 21-Apr-2005
The claimant was with Stephen Lawrence when they were both attacked and Mr Lawrence killed. He claimed damages for the negligent way the police had dealt with his case, and particularly said that they had failed to assess him as a victim of crime, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Police

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.263412

Hart v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary: EAT 6 Dec 2007

EAT Disability discrimination – Reasonable adjustments
The Tribunal found that the Chief Constable was entitled to terminate the services of a probationary constable who could not successfully complete her probationary period because certain disabilities prevented her from carrying out duties in a confrontational setting. It was not a reasonable adjustment to expect the Chief Constable to dilute the standards required. The EAT dismissed the appeal and held that this was a decision the Tribunal was entitled to reach.
Elias P said: ‘In our judgment, the crucial feature here is that the police authority are in effect playing two different roles. They are the employer, but in determining whether the probationary period has been satisfactorily been completed they are also assessing a standard of competence against national criteria. Regulation 12 of the Police Regulations makes it plain that a constable who has completed satisfactorily a probationary period will be able to transfer to another police force without being required to do a further period of probation. In effect the police authority is confirming a formal status on the officer by representing that he or she has completed the probationary requirements.’

Judges:

Elias P J

Citations:

[2007] UKEAT 0403 – 07 – 0612

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Disability Discrimination Act 1995 3A(3), Police Regulations 2003 12 13

Citing:

Cited – Paterson v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis EAT 23-Jul-2007
EAT PART TIME WORKERS
A police officer was found by the Tribunal to be significantly disadvantaged compared with his peers when carrying out examinations for promotion. Nonetheless, the Tribunal held that he . .
Cited – Archibald v Fife Council HL 1-Jul-2004
The claimant was employed as a street sweeper. She suffered injury to her health making it difficult to do her work. She was dismissed, and claimed that being disabled, the employer had not made reasonable adjustments to find alternative work for . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Hart v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary CA 24-Jun-2008
The claimant renewed her application for leave to appeal. She had been a probationary constable, but after various injuries came to suffer disability, preventing her being able to carry out the routine activities of as constable, and her employment . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination, Police

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.261966

Bolt, Regina (on the Application of) v Merseyside Police and Another: Admn 16 Nov 2007

A disciplinary panel had found the claimant police officer in breach of the relevant code of conduct. It decided that he should be dismissed. On a review, an independent Chief Constable upheld the finding of misconduct; but he purported to set aside the sanction of dismissal and to substitute a fine of 13 days’ pay. The Chief Constable of the Merseyside Police declined to accept that substituted penalty and maintained the dismissal directed by the panel. That was challenged by the claimant police officer. It was argued on his behalf that, under the applicable Regulations, the Chief Constable of Merseyside had no power himself to reject the decision of the independent Chief Constable.
Held: The Chief Constable had no such power. It was further argued that, unless and until the decision of the independent Chief Constable was first quashed, the Chief Constable of Merseyside had been bound to follow it and could not arrogate to himself a view that the decision was invalid: ‘a finding that only the court could make’, as it was argued.
The decision of the independent Chief Constable on sanction had been unlawful: it was not one to which he could properly have come and it could not be sustained in law. As to the point raised about the entitlement of the Chief Constable of Merseyside to act as he did, Underhill J, after considering Lord Irvine’s speech in Boddington, said: ‘Whether or not it might have been better for the defendant to seek judicial review of the [independent Chief Constable’s] decision I can see no real prejudice to any party in my considering its lawfulness in the present proceedings.’
. . And ‘Whether those reasons amount in law to a finding of irrationality or a finding that [the independent Chief Constable] misdirected himself as to the limit of his powers under the review provisions, I am satisfied that his conclusion cannot be sustained in law. In my judgment the decision of the panel should not have been overturned on a review.
Having reached that point, in my view it follows that I ought not to grant the relief sought. If the Defendant had followed the arguably more formally correct course of seeking a judicial review of [the independent Chief Constable’s] decision that decision would have been quashed, with the result that the decision of the panel stood (subject to appeal). If I refuse relief in the circumstances which have in fact occurred substantially the same result will be achieved.’

Judges:

Underhill J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 2607 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Mackaill and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Independent Police Complaints Commission Admn 6-Oct-2014
The three claimants were police officers. They met a senior MP at Sutton Coldfield. They emerged from the meeting and were said to have made misleading statements as to the content of the meeting. The IPCC referred the matters back to local forces . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.261804

KD v Chief Constable of Hampshire: QBD 23 Nov 2005

The claimant’s daughter had made a complaint of rape. She alleged that she was sexually harassed by the investigating police officer, and sought damages also from the defendant, his employer. The officer denied that anything improper or non-consensual had taken place.
Held: The taking of the statements was a course of conduct and was plainly harassment. The court was therefore asked to decide whether the statements were taken for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime, within the meaning of s.1(3)(a). The touching had not been consensual, and formed part of a series of acts which amounted to a course of conduct in turn amounting to harassment. Both parties had submitted that the test under section 1(3)(a) was subjective but Tugendhat J took the view that it was subject to the tests of necessity and proportionality, was whether the conduct was objectively justified as a means of preventing or detecting crime, at any rate when it infringed the victim’s rights under article 8. General damages of andpound;20,000 were awarded, with a full indemnity from the officer.

Judges:

Tugendhat J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 2550 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Protection from Harassment Act 1997, European Convention on Human Rights 88

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Hipgrave and Another v Jones QBD 15-Dec-2004
The defendant appealed an order under the 1997 Act saying that it was akin to an order made under the 1998 Act where proof was required to a criminal standard, and that the court had applied only the civil standard.
Held: There was a real . .
Cited – Regina v Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall ex parte CEGB CA 1982
An unwanted kiss may be a battery. Lawton LJ discussed the individual responsibility of a police officer: ‘[chief constables] cannot give an officer under command an order to do acts which can only lawfully be done if the officer himself with . .
Cited – Wainwright and another v Home Office HL 16-Oct-2003
The claimant and her son sought to visit her other son in Leeds Prison. He was suspected of involvement in drugs, and therefore she was subjected to strip searches. There was no statutory support for the search. The son’s penis had been touched . .
Cited – In re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) HL 14-Dec-1995
Evidence allowed – Care Application after Abuse
Children had made allegations of serious sexual abuse against their step-father. He was acquitted at trial, but the local authority went ahead with care proceedings. The parents appealed against a finding that a likely risk to the children had still . .
Cited – Vento v The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (No 2) CA 20-Dec-2002
The claimant had been awarded damages for sex discrimination, including a sum of andpound;25,000 for injury to feelings. The respondent appealed.
Held: The Court of Appeal looked to see whether there had been an error of law in the employment . .
Cited – Thomas v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Simon Hughes CA 18-Jul-2001
A civilian police worker had reported officers for racist remarks. The newspaper repeatedly printed articles and encouraged correspondence which was racially motivated, to the acute distress of the complainant.
Held: Repeated newspaper stories . .
Cited – Thompson v Commissioner of Police of Metropolis; Hsu v Same CA 20-Feb-1997
CS Damages of 200,000 pounds by way of exemplary damages had been awarded against the police for unlawful arrest and assault.
Held: The court gave a guideline maximum pounds 50,000 award against police for . .
Cited – Z v Finland ECHR 25-Feb-1997
A defendant had appealed against his conviction for manslaughter and related offences by deliberately subjecting women to the risk of being infected by him with HIV virus. The applicant, Z, had been married to the defendant, and infected by him with . .

Cited by:

Cited – Hayes v Willoughby CA 13-Dec-2011
Harassment Occurs on the Result, not the Intention
The claimant said that over several years, the respondent had pursued him in many ways challenging his management of a company’s affairs. Complaints had been investigated by the insolvency service and by the police who had discovered nothing to . .
Cited – Hayes v Willoughby SC 20-Mar-2013
The claimant and appellant had been employer and employee who had fallen out, with a settlement in 2005. The appellant then began an unpleasant and obsessive personal vendetta against Mr Hayes, complaining to public bodies with allegations of tax . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other, Human Rights

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.236700

Ashleigh-Nicholson v Staffordshire Police and Another: CA 23 Aug 2002

Judges:

Aldous LJ, Keene LJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 1300

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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.

Police

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.217516

Percy and Another v Hall and Others: CA 10 May 1996

The claimants, demonstrators at Menwith Hill Station, asserted that repeated arrests for trespass were made under unlawful byelaws. In particular they said that the restrictions on trespass were unlawful, since the area was not clearly defined.

Judges:

Simon Brown, Peter Gibson, Schiemann LJJ

Citations:

[1996] EWCA Civ 1348, (1996) 160 JP Rep 788, [1997] QB 924, [1996] 4 All ER 523, [1997] 3 WLR 573

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Broads Authority v Fry Admn 5-Nov-2015
The boat owner had charged tolls against the respondent boat owner. He failed to pay saying that his vessel being moored at a private mooring on ‘adjacent water’ he was not liable. His appeal against his conviction had succeeded at the Crown Court, . .
Cited – Mossell (Jamaica) Ltd (T/A Digicel) v Office of Utilities Regulations and Others PC 21-Jan-2010
(Jamaica) Lord Phillips, after referring to the speech of Lord Irvine in Boddington, rejected the submission that the principle in Boddington applies only within criminal prosecutions, adding: ‘What it all comes to is this. Subordinate legislation, . .
Cited – Majera, Regina (on The Application of v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 20-Oct-2021
The Court was asked whether the Government can lawfully act in a manner which is inconsistent with an order of a judge which is defective, without first applying for, and obtaining, the variation or setting aside of the order. The appellant had been . .
Cited – DN (Rwanda), Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 26-Feb-2020
Challenge to imprisonment pending deportation of successful asylum applicant on release from prison after conviction of an offence specified under the 2004 Order as a particularly serious crime.
Held: The appeal succeeded. ‘The giving of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Police

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.432467

Hussien v Chong Fook Kam: PC 7 Oct 1969

(Malaysia) The Board considered the propriety of an arrest by the police. Lord Devlin said: ‘An arrest occurs when a police officer states in terms that he is arresting or when he uses force to restrain the individual concerned. It occurs also when by words or conduct he makes it clear that he will, if necessary, use force to prevent the individual from going where he may want to go.’
In order to have a reasonable suspicion the officer need not have evidence amounting to a prima facie case: ‘Suspicion in its ordinary meaning is a state of conjecture or surmise where proof is lacking: ‘I suspect but I cannot prove’. Suspicion arises at or near the starting point of an investigation, of which the obtaining of prima facie proof is the end. When such proof has been obtained, the police case is complete; it is ready for trial and passes on to its next stage. It is indeed desirable as a general rule that an arrest should not be made until the case is complete. But if arrest before that is forbidden, it could seriously hamper the police’ and ‘There is another distinction between reasonable suspicion and prima facie proof. Prima facie proof consists of admissible evidence. Suspicion can take account matters that could not be put in evidence at all.’

Judges:

Lord Devlin

Citations:

[1970] AC 942, [1969] UKPC 26, [1970] 2 WLR 441, [1969] 3 All ER 1626

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – O’Hara v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary HL 21-Nov-1996
Second Hand Knowledge Supports Resaobnable Belief
The plaintiff had been arrested on the basis of the 1984 Act. The officer had no particular knowledge of the plaintiff’s involvement, relying on a briefing which led to the arrest.
Held: A reasonable suspicion upon which an arrest was founded . .
Cited – Murray v Ministry of Defence HL 25-May-1988
The plaintiff complained that she had been wrongfully arrested by a soldier, since he had not given a proper reason for her detention.
Held: The House accepted the existence of an implied power in a statute which would be necessary to ensure . .
Cited – Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Raissi CA 12-Nov-2008
The Commissioner appealed against an award of damages for false imprisonment. The claimant had been arrested shortly after a terrorist attack. The judge had held that they had no reasonable belief of his involvement. The Commissioner did not now . .
Cited – Armstrong v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police CA 5-Dec-2008
The Chief Constable appealed against a finding that the claimant had been arrested for rape without reasonable grounds. A description of the rapist had been given which the claimant met in several respects, but from which he clearly differed in . .
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.

Police, Torts – Other, Commonwealth

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.258665

Paterson v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: EAT 23 Jul 2007

EAT PART TIME WORKERS
A police officer was found by the Tribunal to be significantly disadvantaged compared with his peers when carrying out examinations for promotion. Nonetheless, the Tribunal held that he was not disabled within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 because that was not a normal day-to-day activity. In so far as he did claim to be suffer substantial adverse effects on his ability to carry out what the Tribunal accepted were day-to-day activities, the Tribunal was not satisfied that the effects were substantial. They were minor.
The EAT upheld the appeal. The Tribunal had misdirected itself on the proper approach to the meaning of disability. It would wholly undermine the protection afforded by this legislation if the Tribunal were correct.
‘We must read section 1 in a way which gives effect to EU law. We think it can be readily done, simply by giving a meaning to day-to-day activities which encompasses the activities which are relevant to participation in professional life. Appropriate measures must be taken to enable a worker to advance in his or her employment. Since the effect of the disability may adversely affect promotion prospects, then it must be said to hinder participation in professional life.’

Judges:

Elias J P

Citations:

[2007] UKEAT 0635 – 06 – 2307, [2007] IRLR 763, [2007] ICR 1522

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Disability Discrimination Act 1995, Council Directive of 27 November 2000 (2000/78/EEC), Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (Amendment Regulations) 2003

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Ekpe v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis EAT 25-May-2001
EAT Disability Discrimination – Disability
Langstaff QC R said: ‘The question whether the impact of the impairment is upon normal day-to-day activities is, of course, judged by asking whether or not any of . .
Cited – Vicary v British Telecommunications Plc EAT 19-Feb-1998
A medical report in a disability discrimination claim should deal with the doctor’s diagnosis of the impairments, the doctor’s observation of the applicant carrying out day to day activities and the ease with which he was able to perform those . .
Cited – Cruickshank v VAW Motorcast Ltd EAT 1-Nov-2000
The relevant date for determining whether discrimination exists is the date of the alleged discrimination. . .
Cited – Sonia Chacon Navas v Eurest Colectividades SAs (Social Policy) ECJ 11-Jul-2006
ECJ Directive 2000/78/EC – Equal treatment in employment and occupation – Concept of disability.
The concept of disability should be given a uniform and autonomous meaning throughout the EU. The court . .
Cited – Law Hospital NHS Trust v Rush; re an Order and Justment of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Dated 21st January 2000 IHCS 13-Jun-2001
. .
Cited – Regina (H) v Ashworth Hospital Authority and Others, Regina (Ashworth Hospital Authority) v Mental Health Review Tribunal for West Midlands and North West Region and Others CA 28-Jun-2002
The patient was detained under the Act. The Mental Health Tribunal decided he should be released. The hospital disagreed. The patient continued to reside to the Hospital voluntarily, but the hospital viewed the decision to release him as . .
Cited – Cruickshank v VAW Motorcast Ltd EAT 25-Oct-2001
The point of time at which to assess disability is at the time of the alleged discrimination. . .
Cited – Mangold v Helm ECJ 22-Nov-2005
ECJ Grand Chamber – Directive 1999/70/EC – Clauses 2, 5 and 8 of the Framework Agreement on fixed-term work – Directive 2000/78/EC – Article 6 – Equal treatment as regards employment and occupation – Age . .
Cited – Adeneler and Others v Ellinikos Organismos Galaktos ECJ 4-Jul-2006
A Directive was belatedly transposed into national law and after the date by which it ought to have been implemented. The question arose whether the obligation to interpret national law in accordance with the Directive existed from the date the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Hart v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary EAT 6-Dec-2007
EAT Disability discrimination – Reasonable adjustments
The Tribunal found that the Chief Constable was entitled to terminate the services of a probationary constable who could not successfully complete her . .
Cited – Cardwell v The Youth Justice Agency NIIT 8-Jul-2008
. .
Cited – Bourne v ECT Bus Cic EAT 31-Mar-2009
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION: Disability
The Employment Tribunal found as a fact that the Claimant was not disabled. That conclusion was challenged on various grounds including perversity. Appeal dismissed . .
Cited – Chief Constable of Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary v Adams EAT 3-Apr-2009
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION: Disability
Employment Tribunal found that a police constable who suffered from ME and had mobility problems between about 2am and 4am when working night shift as part of a . .
Cited – Birmingham City Council v Ali and Others; Moran v Manchester City Council HL 1-Jul-2009
Homelessness Status Requires LA Action
The House considered appeals challenging whether local authorities who gave unacceptable housing to the homeless had satisfied their obligations to them as homeless people. What was meant by the phrase ‘accommodation which it would be reasonable for . .
Cited – Sobhi v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis (Disability Discrimination : Disability) EAT 2-May-2013
EAT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION – Disability
A woman who suffered from dissociative amnesia, which had made her forget that she had a previous conviction, and who was reprimanded for failing to disclose it . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Police

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.258504

Zelilof v Greece: ECHR 24 May 2007

The Court considered that entrusting the investigation into an allegation against the police to a special agency of the police dealing with disciplinary investigations was an ‘element that reinforces the independence of the inquiry, as the agent conducting it was, in principle, independent of those involved in the events’.

Citations:

17060/03, [2007] ECHR 407

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Morrison v The Independent Police Complaints Commission and Others Admn 26-Oct-2009
The claimant made a complaint of a serious assault by the police, by the use of a Taser. The defendant had referred the complaint to the IPCC, who said that they should investigate it themselves. The claimant said that to accord with his human . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.253194

Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis v Kay: CA 21 May 2007

The commissioner appealed against a judgment that a mass cycle ride held regularly but over different routes did not first require notice to be given.
Held: The commissioner’s appeal succeeded. The fact that the route changed meant that the ride could not be considered to be customary, and so exempt from the notice requirements, however regulary it was held.

Judges:

Levesaon LJ, Wall LF, President

Citations:

Times 13-Jun-2007, [2007] EWCA Civ 477, [2007] 4 All ER 31

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Public Order Act 1986 11

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Kay v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis Admn 27-Jun-2006
For many years and in many large cities, once a month, cyclists had gathered en masse to cycle through the city in a ‘Critical Mass’ demonstration. There was no central organisation. Clarification was sought as to whether the consent of the police . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Kay v Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis HL 26-Nov-2008
The claimant had been involved in a monthly cycle ride through central London which had continued for many years. The ride took place without any central organisation and without any route being pre-planned. They objected to being required to apply . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.252437

UMBS Online Ltd, Regina (on the Application Of) v Serious Organised Crime Agency and Another: CA 2 May 2007

The bank had reported to the respondent its suspicions about funds it held for the claimant. The accounts were frozen, and the customer now sought a judicial review of the refusal of the Agency to reconsider its decision.
Held: The review was granted. The Agency had to acknowledge the great effect on commercial activities of its decisions, and strike a proper balance between undue interference with individual liberites, and the need constantly to fight crime. However the court could not require the bank to make further disclosure where this might prejudice an investigation. The Agency must keep matters under review and give the bank consent to operate the mandate when there was no longer a reason not to do so. Similarly, the Agency should look at the issue again when a request was received direct from the person affected. To suggest as the Agency did that it could act only on requests from the bank was absurd.

Judges:

Ward LJ, Sedley LJ, Hooper Lj

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 406, Times 15-May-2007, [2007] Bus LR 1317

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 335

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina (ex parte UMBS Online Ltd) v Serious Organised Crime Agency Admn 2007
The customers bank accounts had been frozen at the request of the respondent agency after the bank had reported what it thought was suspicious activity to the Agency. It sought judicial review of the agency’s refusal to allow the bank to resume . .
See Also – UMBS Online, Regina (on the Application Of) v Serious Organised Crime Agency CA 21-Mar-2007
Application for leave to appeal against refusal of leave to bring judicial review of a decision of the respondent agency. Leave to appeal was granted, but the matter was returned to the administrative court for review. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Shah and Another v HSBC Private Bank (UK) Ltd CA 4-Feb-2010
Money laundering suspicion to be explained
The customer sought to sue his bank for failing to meet his cheque. The bank sought to rely on the 2002 Act, having reported suspicious activity on freezing the account. He now appealed against summary judgment given for the bank which had refused . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Police

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.251616

LXD and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Merseyside Police: Admn 3 Jul 2019

Application for permission to apply for judicial review and then an application for judicial review of ‘the ongoing failure to take steps to protect the Claimants from direct threats to kill made against them by associates of the First Claimant’s ex-partner, and related decisions’.

Judges:

Dingemans

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 1685 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.639243

DB v Chief Constable of Police Service of Northern Ireland: SC 1 Feb 2017

The appellant said that the police Service of Northern Ireland had failed properly to police the ‘flags protest’ in 2012 and 2013. The issue was not as to the care and effort taken, but an alleged misunderstanding of their powers.
Held: Treacy J was right in his conclusion that the police laboured under a misapprehension as to the extent of their powers and on that account alone the appeal must be allowed.
‘there is no reason to suppose that the avowed gaps in the 1998 Act were other than the product of deliberate legislative intention. Likewise it must now be clearly understood that the Parades Commission had no role where a proposed procession had not been notified. The attempt to persuade the commission to become involved was misconceived. The police did not have power to ban the parades but they had ample legal power to stop them. Contrary to ACC Kerr’s stated position, they could indeed be stopped solely because they were unnotified. There certainly was such a thing as an illegal parade under the Public Processions Act.’
Lord Kerr referred to a number of well-known cases about appellate interference with first instance findings of fact: ‘The statements in all of these cases and, of course, in McGraddie itself were made in relation to trials where oral evidence had been given. On one view, the situation is different where factual findings and the inferences drawn from them are made on the basis of affidavit evidence and consideration of contemporaneous documents. But the vivid expression in Anderson that the first instance trial should be seen as the ‘main event’ rather than a ‘tryout on the road’ has resonance even for a case which does not involve oral testimony. A first instance judgment provides a template on which criticisms are focused and the assessment of factual issues by an appellate court can be a very different exercise in the appeal setting than during the trial. Impressions formed by a judge approaching the matter for the first time may be more reliable than a concentration on the inevitable attack on the validity of conclusions that he or she has reached which is a feature of an appeal founded on a challenge to factual findings. The case for reticence on the part of the appellate court, while perhaps not as strong in a case where no oral evidence has been given, remains cogent.’

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Kerr, Lord Reed,Lord Hughes, Lord Dyson

Citations:

[2017] UKSC 7, UKSC 2014/0231

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary (Video)

Statutes:

Public Processions (Northern Ireland) Act 1998, Police (Northern Ireland) Act 2000 32, European Convention on Human Rights 11

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

Appeal from – DB, Re Judicial Review CANI 1-Jul-2014
A complaint was made that the police had failed properly to understand and implement their duties in managing partisan marches in Northern Ireland.
Held: the 1998 Act had not been undermined by the decisions and actions of the police in . .
At QBNI – DB, Re Judicial Review QBNI 28-Apr-2014
The court granted the respondent’s application for judicial review of the policing by PSNI of certain parades which had not been notified in accordance with the requirements of the Public Processions (Northern Ireland) Act 1998, finding that the . .
Cited – Molnar v Hungary ECHR 7-Oct-2008
ECHR The applicant alleged that the dispersal of the demonstration in which she had participated because of a mere lack of prior notification to the police had infringed her freedom of peaceful assembly, within . .
Cited – Clarke v Edinburgh and District Tramways Co HL 1919
The House considered the ability of an appellate court to reconsider the facts.
Held: The privileges enjoyed by a trial judge extend not only to questions of credibility.
Lord Shaw said that the judge enjoys ‘those advantages, sometimes . .
Cited – Yuill v Yuill CA 1944
Appellate Court’s Caution in Reassessing Facts
The Court of Appeal was invited to reverse the decision of the judge at first instance to accept the evidence of the petitioner (no evidence having been called by the respondent).
Held: The court considered the caution needed when overturning . .
Cited – Watt (or Thomas) v Thomas HL 1947
When Scots Appellate Court may set decision aside
The House considered when it was appropriate for an appellate court in Scotland to set aside the judgment at first instance.
Lord Thankerton said: ‘(1) Where a question of fact has been tried by a judge without a jury, and there is no question . .
Cited – Osman v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-Oct-1998
Police’s Complete Immunity was Too Wide
(Grand Chamber) A male teacher developed an obsession with a male pupil. He changed his name by deed poll to the pupil’s surname. He was required to teach at another school. The pupil’s family’s property was subjected to numerous acts of vandalism, . .
Cited – Re E (A Child); E v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and Another (Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and others intervening) HL 12-Nov-2008
(Northern Ireland) Children had been taken to school in the face of vehement protests from Loyalists. The parents complained that the police had failed to protect them properly, since the behaviour was so bad as to amount to inhuman or degrading . .
Cited – Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis v ZH CA 14-Feb-2013
The claimant was a young epileptic and autistic adult. On a supervised trip to a swimming pool, he became fascinated by the water, and the pool staff called the police. Through the police misunderstanding his needs, he ended up first in the water . .
Cited – McGraddie v McGraddie and Another (Scotland) SC 31-Jul-2013
The parties were father and son, living at first in the US. On the son’s wife becoming seriously ill, the son returned to Scotland. The father advanced a substantal sum for the purchase of a property to live in, but the son put the properties in his . .
Cited – Anderson v City of Bessemer City, North Carolina 19-Mar-1985
United States Supreme Court – The court explained some considerations for the deference to be given by an appellate court to findings of fact made by a lower court: ‘The rationale for deference to the original finder of fact is not limited to the . .
Cited – Housen v Nikolaisen 28-Mar-2002
Supreme Court of Canada – Torts – Motor vehicles – Highways – Negligence – Liability of rural municipality for failing to post warning signs on local access road — Passenger sustaining injuries in motor vehicle accident on rural road — Trial judge . .
Cited – Thomson v Kvaerner Govan Limited HL 31-Jul-2003
The defendant appealed reversal on appeal of the award of damages aganst them. The pursuer had been working within the hull of a ship, and the plank on which he was standing had snapped, causing him to fall. The plank should have been of sufficient . .

Cited by:

Cited – Adamson, Regina (on The Application of) v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council CA 18-Feb-2020
Appropriation was not in sufficient form
The claimants had challenged an order supporting the decision of the Council to use their allotments for a new primary school, saying that the land had be appropriated as allotment land, and that therefore the consent of the minister was needed.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.573800

DB, Re Judicial Review: CANI 1 Jul 2014

A complaint was made that the police had failed properly to understand and implement their duties in managing partisan marches in Northern Ireland.
Held: the 1998 Act had not been undermined by the decisions and actions of the police in relation to the parades. The steps taken by the police to protect the article 8 rights of the appellant and other residents of Short Strand were proportionate.
The incomplete enactment of the North report created a particular difficulty for the police:
‘The North Report recognised that under its proposals there would still remain that cohort of parades that were last minute or unforeseen. It considered that in those circumstances the parades should be controlled by police using their public order powers. The problem for police, which the circumstances in this case demonstrate, is that the partial implementation of the North Report has left a larger cohort of parades outside the Parades Commission’s jurisdiction. In particular, the PSNI have to deal with unnotified parades using their available public order powers including the right of arrest in respect of the organisation or participation in such parades and the prevention of such unlawful parades in accordance with the duty under section 32 of the 2000 Act to prevent crime.’

Judges:

Morgan LCJ, Girvan LJ and Weir J

Citations:

[2014] NICA 56

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

The Public Processions (Northern Ireland) Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

Appeal from – DB, Re Judicial Review QBNI 28-Apr-2014
The court granted the respondent’s application for judicial review of the policing by PSNI of certain parades which had not been notified in accordance with the requirements of the Public Processions (Northern Ireland) Act 1998, finding that the . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – DB v Chief Constable of Police Service of Northern Ireland SC 1-Feb-2017
The appellant said that the police Service of Northern Ireland had failed properly to police the ‘flags protest’ in 2012 and 2013. The issue was not as to the care and effort taken, but an alleged misunderstanding of their powers.
Held: Treacy . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.537092

Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis v ZH: CA 14 Feb 2013

The claimant was a young epileptic and autistic adult. On a supervised trip to a swimming pool, he became fascinated by the water, and the pool staff called the police. Through the police misunderstanding his needs, he ended up first in the water and then being forcibly restrained. The commissioner now appealed against the findings or assault.
Held: The appeal failed. At no point had the officers sought advice from those having care of the claimant or from the pool staff.
Lord Dyson MR said: ‘operational discretion is important to the police. … It has been recognised by the European court: see Austin v United Kingdom 55 EHRR 14, para 56. And I have kept it well in mind in writing this judgment. But operational discretion is not sacrosanct. It cannot be invoked by the police in order to give them immunity from liability for everything that they do.’

Judges:

Lord Dyson MR, Richards, Black LJJ

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 69, [2013] MHLR 69, (2013) 16 CCL Rep 109, [2013] HRLR 18, [2013] PIQR P11, [2013] Eq LR 363, [2013] 1 WLR 3021, [2013] 3 All ER 113, [2013] WLR(D) 66

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Mental Capacity Act 2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Roberts, Regina (on the application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and another SC 17-Dec-2015
The Court considered the validity of suspicionless stop and search activities under s 60 of the 1994 Act, by police officers.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. The safeguards attending the use of the s 60 power, and in particular the . .
Cited – DB v Chief Constable of Police Service of Northern Ireland SC 1-Feb-2017
The appellant said that the police Service of Northern Ireland had failed properly to police the ‘flags protest’ in 2012 and 2013. The issue was not as to the care and effort taken, but an alleged misunderstanding of their powers.
Held: Treacy . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.470967

Re E (A Child); E v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and Another (Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and others intervening): HL 12 Nov 2008

(Northern Ireland) Children had been taken to school in the face of vehement protests from Loyalists. The parents complained that the police had failed to protect them properly, since the behaviour was so bad as to amount to inhuman or degrading treatment, and that the police had given undue weight to the right to demonstrate. The House was asked whether the duty to protect the children was absolute, or whether it had to be balanced as reasonable as against the right of protest.
Held: There remained substantial disputes of fact yet to be resolved. The test set out in Smith is not sufficient to determine an issue of proportionality under the Convention. The court of appeal had used that test and had therefore erred.
The police had taken the view that only a negotiated community solution would work. That had indeed eventually worked. The police ‘were uniquely placed through their experience and intelligence to make a judgment on the wisest course to take in all the circumstances. They had long and hard experience of the problems encountered in dealing with riotous situations in urban areas in Northern Ireland. The difficulty of catching and arresting malefactors who had means of retreat available through paths and gardens are self-evident. The police had available to them sources of information about what was happening in the community and what was likely to happen if they took certain courses of action, which they were experienced in assessing.’ The police had therefore ‘fulfilled the positive obligation imposed by article 3 and that the appellant has not established a breach of her rights or those of her child under that article.’

Judges:

Lord Hoffmann, Lord Scott of Foscote, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

Citations:

[2008] UKHL 66, [2009] UKHRR 277, [2009] 1 All ER 467, [2008] 3 WLR 1208, [2009] 1 AC 536, [2009] HRLR 8, 25 BHRC 720

Links:

Bailii, HL

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

Cited – Ilhan v Turkey ECHR 27-Jun-2000
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection dismissed (victim); Preliminary objection dismissed (non-exhaustion); No violation of Art. 2; Violation of Art. 3; Violation of Art. 13; . .
Cited – Osman v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-Oct-1998
Police’s Complete Immunity was Too Wide
(Grand Chamber) A male teacher developed an obsession with a male pupil. He changed his name by deed poll to the pupil’s surname. He was required to teach at another school. The pupil’s family’s property was subjected to numerous acts of vandalism, . .
Cited – Oneryildiz v Turkey ECHR 18-Jun-2002
(Grand Chamber) The applicant had lived with his family in a slum bordering on a municipal house-hold refuse tip. A methane explosion at the tip resulted in a landslide which engulfed the applicant’s house, killing his close relatives. The applicant . .
Cited – Hertfordshire Police v Van Colle; Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police HL 30-Jul-2008
Police Obligations to Witnesses is Limited
A prosecution witness was murdered by the accused shortly before his trial. The parents of the deceased alleged that the failure of the police to protect their son was a breach of article 2.
Held: The House was asked ‘If the police are alerted . .
Cited – In re Officer L HL 31-Jul-2007
Police officers appealed against refusal of orders protecting their anonymity when called to appear before the Robert Hamill Inquiry.
Held: ‘The tribunal accordingly approached the matter properly under article 2 in seeking to ascertain . .
Cited – Z And Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 10-May-2001
Four children complained that, for years before they were taken into care by the local authority, its social services department was well aware that they were living in filthy conditions and suffering ‘appalling’ neglect in the home of their . .
Cited – Gldani Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses Others v Georgia ECHR 3-May-2007
The applicant claimed that the police had known in advance of an attack upon the applicants by religious opponents, which he said would constitute inhuman or degrading treatment, but that they had failed to take any preventive action.
Held: . .
Cited – YF v Turkey ECHR 22-Jul-2003
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8 ; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award ; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings . .
Cited – Regina v Ministry of Defence ex parte Smith; ex parte Grady CA 3-Nov-1995
Four appellants challenged the policy of the ministry to discharge homosexuals from the armed services.
Held: Where a measure affects fundamental rights or has profoundly intrusive effects, the courts will anxiously scrutinise the decision to . .
Cited – Marckx v Belgium ECHR 13-Jun-1979
Recognition of illegitimate children
The complaint related to the manner in which parents were required to adopt their own illegitimate child in order to increase his rights. Under Belgian law, no legal bond between an unmarried mother and her child results from the mere fact of birth. . .
Cited – Regina (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 23-May-2001
A prison policy requiring prisoners not to be present when their property was searched and their mail was examined was unlawful. The policy had been introduced after failures in search procedures where officers had been intimidated by the presence . .
Cited – Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary HL 27-Feb-2003
The applicant was a chief inspector of police. She had been prevented from carrying out appraisals of other senior staff, and complained of sex discrimination.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. The tribunal had taken a two stage approach. It . .
Cited – Nachova and Others v Bulgaria ECHR 26-Feb-2004
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (estoppel) ; Violation of Art. 2 with regard to deaths ; Violation of Art. 2 with regard to lack of effective investigation ; Not . .
Cited – Carson, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; Reynolds v Same HL 26-May-2005
One claimant said that as a foreign resident pensioner, she had been excluded from the annual uprating of state retirement pension, and that this was an infringement of her human rights. Another complained at the lower levels of job-seeker’s . .
Cited – Begum (otherwise SB), Regina (on the Application of) v Denbigh High School HL 22-Mar-2006
The student, a Muslim wished to wear a full Islamic dress, the jilbab, but this was not consistent with the school’s uniform policy. She complained that this interfered with her right to express her religion.
Held: The school’s appeal . .
Cited – Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 21-Mar-2007
Appellate Roles – Human Rights – Families Split
The House considered the decision making role of immigration appellate authorities when deciding appeals on Human Rights grounds, against refusal of leave to enter or remain, under section 65. In each case the asylum applicant had had his own . .
Cited – Cobzaru v Romania ECHR 26-Jul-2007
The applicant complained of having been beaten by police officers when he went to the police station to report an attack. He was a Roma and complained of State discrimination. . .
Cited – Secic v Croatia ECHR 31-May-2007
The applicant had been attacked and beaten by skinheads shouting racial abuse. He complained that as a Roma, the police had failed through race discrimination properly to investigate his complaint.
Held: The court repeated the statement that . .

Cited by:

Cited – E and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 10-Jun-2011
Judicial review was sought of a decision by the respondent to prosecute a child for her alleged sexual abuse of her younger sisters. Agencies other than the police and CPS considered that a prosecution would harm both the applicant and her sisters. . .
Cited – DB v Chief Constable of Police Service of Northern Ireland SC 1-Feb-2017
The appellant said that the police Service of Northern Ireland had failed properly to police the ‘flags protest’ in 2012 and 2013. The issue was not as to the care and effort taken, but an alleged misunderstanding of their powers.
Held: Treacy . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children, Police

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.277815

Van Colle and Another v Chief Constable of the Hertfordshire Police: CA 24 Apr 2007

The deceased had acted as a witness in an intended prosecution. He had sought protection after being threatened. No effective protection was provided, and he was murdered. The chief constable appealed a finding of liability.
Held: The responsible officer had not been aware of the applicable protocol. The police ought to have been aware of the risk to the deceased. Had they acted, there was a possibility that the death would have been avoided.

Judges:

Sir Anthony Clarke MR, Sedley LJ, Lloyd LJ

Citations:

Times 10-May-2007, [2007] EWCA Civ 325, [2007] 3 All ER 122, [2007] 1 WLR 1821, [2007] PIQR Q7, [2007] 2 FCR 469, [2007] UKHRR 869, [2007] HRLR 25, [2007] Inquest LR 69, [2007] 2 Cr App R 32, (2007) 151 SJLB 576

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 2 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Van Colle v Hertfordshire Police QBD 10-Mar-2006
The claimants claimed for the estate of their murdered son. He had been waiting to give evidence in a criminal trial, and had asked the police for support having received threats. Other witnesses had also suffered intimidation including acts of . .
Cited – Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire HL 28-Apr-1987
No General ty of Care Owed by Police
The mother of a victim of the Yorkshire Ripper claimed in negligence against the police alleging that they had failed to satisfy their duty to exercise all reasonable care and skill to apprehend the perpetrator of the murders and to protect members . .
Cited – McCann and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 6-Oct-1995
Wrong assumptions made by police officers in the killing of terrorists amounted to a human rights breach, despite the existence of danger to the public of an imminent attack. Article 2(1) is ‘one of the most fundamental provisions in the . .
Cited – Brooks v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and others HL 21-Apr-2005
The claimant was with Stephen Lawrence when they were both attacked and Mr Lawrence killed. He claimed damages for the negligent way the police had dealt with his case, and particularly said that they had failed to assess him as a victim of crime, . .
Cited – Osman v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-Oct-1998
Police’s Complete Immunity was Too Wide
(Grand Chamber) A male teacher developed an obsession with a male pupil. He changed his name by deed poll to the pupil’s surname. He was required to teach at another school. The pupil’s family’s property was subjected to numerous acts of vandalism, . .
Cited – Bloggs 61, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 18-Jun-2003
The applicant sought review of a decision to remove him from a witness protection scheme within the prison. He claimed that having been promised protection, he had a legitimate expectation of protection, having been told he would receive protection . .
Cited – Keenan v The United Kingdom ECHR 3-Apr-2001
A young prisoner was known to be at risk of suicide, but nevertheless was not provided with adequate specialist medical supervision. He was punished for an offence, by way of segregation which further put him at risk.
Held: Inhuman and . .
Cited – Regina (A and others) (Widgery Soldiers) v Lord Saville of Newdigate and Others CA 19-Dec-2001
The court would apply common sense in deciding whether soldier witnesses should be obliged to attend in person at an enquiry in Londonderry, where they claimed their lives would be at risk. It was not appropriate to seek to define what would be . .
Cited – DF v Chief Constable of Norfolk Police Secretary of State for Home Department Admn 15-Aug-2002
A prisoner serving a life sentence challenged the decision of the Prison Service to refuse to admit him to a witness protection unit and contended that the Norfolk Police had failed in their duty to provide appropriate information to the Prison . .
Cited – Greenfield, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Feb-2005
The appellant had been charged with and disciplined for a prison offence. He was refused legal assistance at his hearing, and it was accepted that the proceedings involved the determination of a criminal charge within the meaning of article 6 of the . .
Cited – Anufrijeva and Another v London Borough of Southwark CA 16-Oct-2003
The various claimants sought damages for established breaches of their human rights involving breaches of statutory duty by way of maladministration. Does the state have a duty to provide support so as to avoid a threat to the family life of the . .
Appeal from – Van Colle v Hertfordshire Police QBD 10-Mar-2006
The claimants claimed for the estate of their murdered son. He had been waiting to give evidence in a criminal trial, and had asked the police for support having received threats. Other witnesses had also suffered intimidation including acts of . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Hertfordshire Police v Van Colle; Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police HL 30-Jul-2008
Police Obligations to Witnesses is Limited
A prosecution witness was murdered by the accused shortly before his trial. The parents of the deceased alleged that the failure of the police to protect their son was a breach of article 2.
Held: The House was asked ‘If the police are alerted . .
See Also – Van Colle (T/A GVC Optometrists) v Revenue and Customs VDT 31-Aug-2007
VDT VAT – three-year ‘cap’ – late claims due partly to tragic family circumstances – whether any basis for time limit to be disapplied – no
VAT – interest – whether due on repayments – extent of trader’s . .
See Also – Van Colle and Van Colle v The United Kingdom ECHR 9-Feb-2010
Statement of Facts . .
See Also – Van Colle v The United Kingdom ECHR 13-Nov-2012
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police, Negligence

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.251450

James-Bowen and Others v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis: CA 30 Nov 2016

Appeal against the order of Jay J. striking out the particulars of claim and entering judgment for the respondent, the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, in an action brought against him by the four appellants, all of whom were, at the time of the events with which it is concerned, serving officers in the Metropolitan Police Service

Judges:

Moore-Bick VP CA, Longmore, Patten LJJ

Citations:

[2016] EWCA Civ 1217, [2016] WLR(D) 651

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – James-Bowen and Others v The Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis QBD 1-May-2015
The claimants were police officers, subject to disciplinary proceedings after a complaint by an arrested terrorist subject that he had been assaulted. The allegations were dismissed, but they now complained that the respondent had not implemented . .

Cited by:

Appeal fom – James-Bowen and Others v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis SC 25-Jul-2018
The Court was asked whether the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (‘the Commissioner’) owes a duty to her officers, in the conduct of proceedings against her based on their alleged misconduct, to take reasonable care to protect them from . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.571934

James-Bowen and Others v The Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis: QBD 1 May 2015

The claimants were police officers, subject to disciplinary proceedings after a complaint by an arrested terrorist subject that he had been assaulted. The allegations were dismissed, but they now complained that the respondent had not implemented measures to protect them in the course of civil proceedings begun by the arrested suspect against the respondent.

Judges:

Jay J

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 1249 (QB), [2015] CN 746

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – James-Bowen and Others v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis CA 30-Nov-2016
Appeal against the order of Jay J. striking out the particulars of claim and entering judgment for the respondent, the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, in an action brought against him by the four appellants, all of whom were, at the time . .
At first instance – James-Bowen and Others v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis SC 25-Jul-2018
The Court was asked whether the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (‘the Commissioner’) owes a duty to her officers, in the conduct of proceedings against her based on their alleged misconduct, to take reasonable care to protect them from . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Police

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.546273