The court heard a claim of malicious prosecution.
Held: A person who is not a party to a prosecution but actively puts the criminal process in motion may be liable for malicious prosecution.
Where an individual falsely and maliciously gives a police officer information indicating that some person is guilty of a criminal offence and states that he is willing to give evidence in court of the matters in question, it is properly to be inferred that he desires and intends that the person he names should be prosecuted. Where the circumstances are such that the facts relating to the alleged offence can be within the knowledge only of the complainant, as was the position here, then it becomes virtually impossible for the police officer to exercise any independent discretion or judgment, and if a prosecution is instituted by the police officer the proper view of the matter is that the prosecution has been procured by the complainant.
The question to be asked was: ‘Is there any evidence to show that the defendant was actively instrumental in putting the law in force?’
Judges:
Lopes J
Citations:
(1880) 43 LT 603
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Hunt v AB CA 22-Oct-2009
The claimant sought damages from a woman in malicious prosecution, saying that she had made a false allegation of rape against him. He had served two years in prison.
Held: The claim failed. A complainant is not a prosecutor, and is not liable . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Torts – Other
Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.377303
