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: 2000 To: 2000
This page lists 33 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.
Regina v Malik; CACD 2000 - [2000] 2 Cr App 8
Regina v Local Authority and Police Authority in the Midlands ex parte LM [2000] 1 FCR 736; [2000] 1 FLR 612
2000
Dyson J
Police, Human Rights
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."
Employment Rights Act 1996 111
1 Citers
Clarke v Chief Constable of North Wales Police [2000] All ER (D) 477
2000
Admn
Police
Although the power of arrest without warrant depends on the existence in the mind of the arresting officer of reasonable suspicion of the material elements of an arrestable offence, there is no requirement of law that the constable must have first hand knowledge of these. So long as they come from a source which is reasonable for her to rely on they can properly form the basis of a reasonable suspicion in the constable's own mind.
1 Citers
John Stewart for Judicial Review of her Continued Detention In Prison [2000] ScotCS 13
18 Jan 2000
SCS
Scotland, Police
[ Bailii ]
Kuddus v Chief Constable of Leicestershire Times, 16 March 2000; [2000] EWCA Civ 39
10 Feb 2000
CA
Damages, Torts - Other, Police
Misfeasance in public office was not a tort in which exemplary damages would be available before 1964, and, following the restriction on such awards in Rookes v Barnard was not now a tort for which such damages night be payable. Kindred torts, which might normally accompany such a claim against the police, might give rise to such a claim however.
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Fitt v United Kingdom 29777/96; [2000] ECHR 89; (2000) 30 EHRR 480; [2000] Po LR 10; [2000] 30 EHRR 480
16 Feb 2000
ECHR
Wildhaber P
Human Rights, Criminal Practice, Police
(Grand Chamber) Complaint as to non-disclosure of prosecution evidence.
European Convention on Human Rights 5 6.1
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ Worldii ]
Amann v Switzerland 27798/95; (2000) 30 EHRR 843; [2000] ECHR 88; ECHR 2000-II; [2011] ECHR 1671
16 Feb 2000
ECHR
Human Rights, Police
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8 with regard to interception of telephone call; Violation of Art. 8 with regard to creation and storing of information card; Preliminary objection dismissed; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses award - Convention procedure
"telephone calls received on private or business premises are covered by notions of 'private life' within the meaning of article 8.1."
European Convention on Human Rights 8.1
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
Jasper v The United Kingdom Times, 01 March 2000; 28901/95; (2000) 30 EHRR 441; (2000) 30 EHHR 1; (2000) 30 EHRR 480; [2000] ECHR 90
16 Feb 2000
ECHR
Wildhaber P
Human Rights, Police, Criminal Practice
Grand Chamber - The defendants had been convicted after the prosecution had withheld evidence from them and from the judge under public interest immunity certificates. They complained that they had not had fair trials. Held: The right was breached insofar as the prosecution had themselves sought to make that assessment without judicial involvement. Disclosure at a later stage on appeal was not a sufficient remedy, since the task of the appellate court was different. Nevertheless if the judge had been given some involvement, a necessary withholding could be proper. The court recognised that it was a "fundamental aspect of the right to a fair trial that criminal proceedings, including the elements of such proceedings which relate to procedure, should be adversarial and that there should be equality of arms between the prosecution and defence. The right to an adversarial trial means, in a criminal case, that both prosecution and defence must be given the opportunity to have knowledge of and comment on the observations filed and the evidence adduced by the other party. In addition Article 6(1) requires, as indeed does English law, that the prosecution authorities should disclose to the defence all material evidence in their possession for or against the accused" but "the European Court's task is to ascertain whether the decision-making procedure applied in each case complied, as far as possible, with the requirements of adversarial proceedings and equality of arms and incorporated adequate safeguards to protect the interests of the accused".
European Convention on Human Rights 5 6.1
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ Worldlii ]
Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police and Others v Khan; CA 24-Feb-2000 - Times, 15 March 2000; [2000] EWCA Civ 53; [2000] ICR 1169
Christopher John Gloster v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police (2000) 9 PIQR P114; [2000] EWCA Civ 90
24 Mar 2000
CA
Pill and Hale LJJ
Police, Animals
The plaintiff was a police officer. While carrying out his duties he was bitten by a police dog, an Alsatian, which had been trained to be aggressive when working. The claim failed, largely on the ground that on the particular facts the damage was not caused by the relevant characteristic of the dog.
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Sussex Police Authority ex parte Stewart Times, 13 April 2000; Gazette, 05 May 2000; [2000] EWCA Civ 101
4 Apr 2000
CA
Police
A police constable had been injured. She regained some health but sought to retire on health grounds. It was held that her continuing disability would limit her to desk-bound duties. These were insufficient to constitute the full range of operational duties expected of a member of the force. It was wrong to require her to return.
Police Pensions Regulations 1987 A12(2)
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police Ex P Lainton; CA 4-Apr-2000 - Times, 04 April 2000
Chief Constable of Kent v Rixon, Rixon (Suing As Rixons Solicitors) and Wilson; CA 5-Apr-2000 - Times, 11 April 2000; [2000] EWCA Civ 104
Bibby v Chief Constable of Essex Police; CA 6-Apr-2000 - Times, 24 April 2000; [2000] EWCA Civ 113; (2000) 164 JP 297
Dhesi v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police; CA 9-May-2000 - Times, 09 May 2000
Dingley v Chief Constable of Strathclyde Police; HL 11-May-2000 - [2000] UKHL 14; 2000 SC (HL) 77
Regina v The Director of Public Prosecutions, Ex Parte Manning, Ex Parte Melbourne; QBD 17-May-2000 - [2000] EWHC Admin 342; [2001] 1 QB 330; [2000] Inquest LR 133; [2000] Po LR 172; [2001] HRLR 3; [2000] 3 WLR 463; [2000] EWHC 562 (QB); [2001] QB 330
Chief Constable of West Midlands Police, Regina (On the Application of) v Coventry Crown Court [2000] EWHC 648 (Admin); [2001] LLR 144
6 Jun 2000
Admn
Munby J
Police, Licensing, Costs
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.
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Chief Constable of Merseyside, Ex Parte Bennion; QBD 18-Jul-2000 - Times, 18 July 2000; Gazette, 27 July 2000
Waters v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis; HL 27-Jul-2000 - Times, 01 August 2000; Gazette, 12 October 2000; [2000] 1 WLR 1607; [2000] UKHL 50; [2000] IRLR 720
Chief Constable of West Midlands Police v Heaven [2000] EWCA Civ 232
27 Jul 2000
CA
Police
[ Bailii ]
Darker v Chief Constable of The West Midlands Police; HL 1-Aug-2000 - Gazette, 17 August 2000; Times, 01 August 2000; [2000] UKHL 44; [2001] AC 435; [2000] 3 WLR 747
Regina v South Yorkshire Police Authority Ex Parte Booth Times, 10 October 2000
10 Oct 2000
QBD
Police, Employment, Costs
There is no power in law for a police authority to fund payment of legal expenses incurred by an officer of the rank of Superintendent or below when defending disciplinary proceedings. The statutory code was not displaced by the Duckinfield case. The Regulations and Act were clear in restricting such assistance to appeals against disciplinary findings, and to proceedings against senior officers.
Police Act 1996 - Police (Conduct) Senior Officer Regulations 1999 (1999 No 731)
Regina v Sanghera; CA 26-Oct-2000 - Times, 26 October 2000
Regina v Chief Constables of C and D, Ex Parte A; QBD 7-Nov-2000 - Times, 07 November 2000
Thomson for Judicial Review of Two Medical Certificates Provided In Terms of Regulations H1 and H2 of the Police Pensions Act 1987 [2000] ScotCS 301
1 Dec 2000
SCS
Police
[ Bailii ]
Thomson for Judicial Review of Two Medical Certificates Provided In Terms of Regulations H1 and H2 of the Police Pensions Act 1987
1 Dec 2000
SCS
Lord Philip
Police
[ ScotC ]
Abrahams v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis Gazette, 01 February 2001; Times, 21 December 2000; [2001] 1 WLR 1257; [2000] EWCA Civ 3043; [2000] Po LR 374
8 Dec 2000
CA
Mantell LJ, Kay LJ
Torts - Other, Criminal Practice, Police
The claimant had been arrested for swearing at a police officer. After her arrest, the claimant made admissions to secure a caution, rather than risk prosecution. She later sought to begin a civil action for damages against the police in the course of which she the denied the matters which she had earlier admitted. Held: The claimant's appeal against a strike out of her claim succeeded. The admissions had been secured by an apparent breach of duty by the officer, and she was not be estopped from bringing the claim. The formal caution is not so closely analogous to a conviction that the claimant should be barred from beginning civil proceedings because of it. An attack on the caution did not involve attacking any decision of a court of co-ordinate jurisdiction.
Lord Justice Mantell said: 'the caution was not brought about by any decision of a court of justice, so did not fall foul of the rule in Saif Ali. An attack on it did not involve attacking a decision of a court of co-ordinate jurisdiction.'
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Sinclair v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire and British Telecommunications Plc; CA 12-Dec-2000 - [2000] EWCA Civ 319
Attorney General's Reference No. 3 of 1999 [2000] UKHL 71; [2001] 2 AC 91; [2001] 1 All ER 577; [2001] Crim LR 394; [2001] HRLR 16; [2001] 2 WLR 56; [2001] 1 Cr App R 34; [2000] Po LR 386
14 Dec 2000
HL
Lord Steyn, Lord Cooke of Thorndon, Lord Clyde, Lord Hutton, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough
Criminal Practice, Human Rights, Police
An horrific rape had taken place. The defendant was arrested on a separate matter, tried and acquitted. He was tried under a false ID. His DNA sample should have been destroyed but wasn't. Had his identity been known, his DNA could have been kept because of other convictions. He was arrested for the rape after a DNA match. It was argued that under the 1984 Act, the sample could not be used in evidence against him. The House considered whether the section was mandatory or directory. Held: The direction to destroy such a sample was mandatory, and the sample should not have been used for the investigation of an offence. However, "paragraph (b), in contrast with paragraph (a), does not go on to provide that, in the event of such unlawful use, the results of the investigation shall not be admissible in evidence against the person who was entitled to the destruction of the sample. Nor does it provide that an unlawful investigation shall be null and void or deemed never to have occurred " Any question as to the fairness of the admissibility of the evidence could still be addressed by the court under section 78.
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 64(3B) - Human Rights Act 1998
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Forbes (Anthony Leroy) (Attorney General's Reference No 3 of 1999) Times, 19 December 2000; Gazette, 22 February 2001; [2000] UKHL 66; [2000] 1 CAR 430 (HL); [2001] 1 AC 473; [2001] 1 Crim App R 430; [2001] 2 WLR 1; [2001] 1 All ER 686
19 Dec 2000
HL
Lord Bingham of Cornhill
Police, Criminal Evidence
The provisions of the Code of Practice regarding identification parades are mandatory and additional unwritten conditions are not to be inserted. Where there was an identification and the suspect challenged that identification, and consented to the parade, the parade must be held. There is nothing in the words of code of practice to allow police officers not to hold an identification parades where the identification was considered to be already completed. There is nothing in the code to justify a distinction as to quality of identification evidence between that of a police officer and of a member of the public. In the past, identification which had received complete and unequivocal acceptance had proved to be the source of miscarriages of justice. Once a breach of the Codes was found, the trial judge must deal with this in his summing up in words which were appropriate to the situation. Nevertheless, in this case there had been a prior unequivocal identification. Lord Bingham of Cornhill: "If an eye-witness of a criminal incident makes plain to the police that he cannot identify the culprit, it will very probably be futile to invite that witness to attend an identification parade. If an eye-witness may be able to identify clothing worn by a culprit but not the culprit himself, it will probably be futile to mount an identification parade rather than simply inviting the witness to identify the clothing. If a case is one of pure recognition of someone well-known to the eye-witness, it may again be futile to hold an identification parade. But save in cases such as these, or other exceptional circumstances, the effect of paragraph 2.3 is clear: if (a) the police have sufficient information to justify the arrest of a particular person for suspected involvement in an offence, and (b) an eye-witness has identified or may be able to identify that person, and (c) the suspect disputes his identification as a person involved in the commission of that offence, an identification parade must be held if (d) the suspect consents and (e) paragraphs 2.4, 2.7 and 2.10 of Code D do not apply."
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ]
Regina v Joint Committee for Purpose of Making Appointments To Humberside Police Authority ex parte East Riding of Yorkshire Council [2000] EWHC Admin 434
19 Dec 2000
Admn
Police, Local Government
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Jacobs Times, 28 December 2000
28 Dec 2000
CACD
Police, Discrimination, Criminal Sentencing
A police officer is as entitled as anybody else not to be racially abused. An arrested person made racist remarks against a police officer, and was convicted of the offence of threatening behaviour, racially aggravated. Even though the appellant might not be racist, her offence passed the custody threshold. Even so a short sentence of three months was substituted.
Crime and Disorder Act 1998 31(1)(b) 31(4)
