Site icon swarb.co.uk

Halford v Chief Constable of Hampshire Constabulary, Curtis: CA 13 Feb 2003

The claimant appealed orders in favour of the defendant that statements, which he claimed were defamatory, were made in situations attracting qualified privilege. Allegations had been made by his step-children that the claimant had assaulted them. He had been interviewed by the police, but a prosecution was rejected because the children’s evidence was inconsistent with the marks noted. Nevertheless, his work as an educational welfare officer, and the suggestion that the police retained an ‘open file’ led to them staying on the child protection register. The claimant also alleged malice.
Held: The context of the child protection hearing was clearly one attracting qualified privilege. As to malice, the test is subjective, depending on the defendant’s state of mind and intention. The remaining possibility of other acts of abuse was enough to destroy any possible foundation for the allegation of malice.

Judges:

Lord Justice Sedley, Lord Justice Simon Brown, Mr Justice Jacob

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 102

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedHorrocks v Lowe HL 1974
The plaintiff complained of an alleged slander spoken at a meeting of the Town Council. The council meeting was an occasion attracting qualified privilege. The judge at trial found that the councillor honestly believed that what he had said in the . .
CitedAlexander v Arts Council of Wales CA 9-Apr-2001
In a defamation action, where the judge considered that, taken at their highest, the allegations made by the claimant would be insufficient to establish the claim, he could grant summary judgment for the defence. If the judge considered that a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Police

Updated: 18 November 2022; Ref: scu.179033

Exit mobile version