Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  















Police - From: 1991 To: 1991

This page lists 6 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.


 
 Regina v Chief Constable of Cambridgeshire, ex parte M; CA 1991 - [1991] 2 QB 499

 
 Regina v Lewes Crown Court ex parte Hill; 1991 - [1991] 93 Cr App R 60
 
Regina v Leeds Crown Court ex parte Switalski [1991] COD 119; (1991) CLR 559
1991

Judge Savill QC, Neill LJ
Criminal Practice, Police, Legal Professions
It is preferable, in an ordinary case, for an application for a search warrant in a solicitor's office to be made on notice. However, if a solicitor under investigation were to have knowledge of what was contemplated the material sought might disappear or be tampered with before it could be seen by the investigator, a judge might be persuaded that an ex parte application was appropriate and necessary.
Neill LJ said: "There is . . . a very powerful argument in support of the proposition that a warrant issued under section 9 schedule 1 of the 1984 Act should, however wide its scope, contain some express condition to exclude items subject to legal privilege."
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 10
1 Citers


 
Hughes v National Union of Mineworkers [1991] 4 All ER 278; [1991] ICR 669
1991
QBD
May J
Police, Negligence
The court struck out as disclosing no cause of action a claim by a police officer who was injured while policing the miners' strike and who alleged that the police officer in charge had deployed his men negligently. Held: The officer in charge plainly owed no duty of care to the plaintiff. While there were circumstances in which a police officer might owe a duty of care to another, such a duty did not extend to circumstances where what was called in question was the immediate operational control of policemen seeking to deal with violent public disorder where the plaintiff's injuries were directly caused by those perpetrating the disorder. "as a matter of public policy, if senior police officers charged with the task of deploying what may or may not be an adequate force of officers to control serious public disorder are to be potentially liable to individual officers under their command if those individuals are injured by attacks from rioters, that would be significantly detrimental to the control of public order. It will no doubt often happen that in such circumstances critical decisions have to be made with little or no time for considered thought and where many individual officers may be in some danger of physical injury of one kind or another. It is not, I consider, in the public interest that those decisions should generally be the potential target of a negligence claim if rioters do injure an individual officer, since the fear of such a claim would be likely to affect the decisions to the prejudice of the very task which the decisions are intended to advance. "
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Mercer v Chief Constable of Lancashire [1991] 1 WLR 367
1991
CA
Lord Donaldson MR
Litigation Practice, Police
When justifying a detention, the Chief Constable must prove it "was lawful minute by minute and hour by hour".
1 Citers


 
S v Switzerland 12629/87;13965/88; [1991] ECHR 54
28 Nov 1991
ECHR

Human Rights, Legal Professions, Police
ECHR Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) - Violation of Art. 6-3-c; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings.
A number of the applicant's meetings with his lawyer were supervised by a police official, and his letters to his lawyer were intercepted and used for graphological reports. Held: "an accused's right to communicate with his advocate out of the hearing of a third person is part of the basic requirements of a fair trial in a democratic society and follows from Article 6(3)(c) of the Convention. If a lawyer were unable to confer with his client and receive confidential instructions from him without such surveillance, his assistance would lose much of its usefulness, whereas the Convention is intended to guarantee rights that are practical and effective (see inter alia the Artico judgment of 13 May 1980, series A no.37, p.16, para.33)."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.