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: 2002 To: 2002

This page lists 41 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.

 
Regina (on the application of Carter) v Ipswich Magistrates' Court [2002] EWHC 332 Admin
2002
Admn
Maurice Kay J
Police
Mrs Carter had paid a man to murder someone. The man was an undercover police agent. In time Mrs Carter was convicted of soliciting to commit murder, but Mr Carter was acquitted. She disclaimed all interest in the money she had paid in favour of her husband. He applied to the Magistrates under the Act, asking for the money be returned to him. They declined, holding that they had a discretion which they declined to exercise it in favour of Mr Carter, given that ‘the money had been intended to bring about the death of a human being’. He applied for judicial review. Held: Referring to Webb, the magistrates had not been entitled to take account of the matter which had conditioned their decision. He quashed their decision and ordered that the police must pay the money out to Mr Carter.
Police (Property) Act 1897 1
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Chief Constable of Norfolk, ex parte DF [2002] EWHC 1738 (Admin)
2002
Admn
Crane J
Police, Human Rights
The court considered the duties of the police to protect the applicants. Held: The search for a phrase which encapsulates a threshold of risk which engages article 2 is a search for a chimera. The degree of risk described as 'real and immediate' in Osman …., as used in that case, was a very high degree of risk calling for positive action from the authorities to protect life. It was 'a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual or individuals from the criminal acts of a third party' which was, or ought to have been, known to the authorities. Such a degree of risk is well above the threshold that will engage article 2 when the risk is attendant upon some action that an authority is contemplating putting into effect itself. It was not an appropriate one in the present context.
European Convention on Human Rights 2
1 Cites


 
The Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester Police v Joseph Martin McNally Times, 06 March 2002; [2001] EWCA Civ 14
25 Jan 2002
CA
Lord Justice Auld, Lord Justice Robert Walker, And, Sir Christopher Slade
Human Rights, Police
The claimant sought damages against the police for malicious prosecution and otherwise. He sought disclosure of whether a party referred to in the case as X, had at any time been a paid informer. The police appealed an order to disclose this. Counsel for the police had sought to rely upon assertions made as to X's behaviour. The judge refused a public interest immunity certificate. Held: The general rule is against disclosure of informant's identities even in civil cases, but there are exceptions, including the need to avoid a miscarriage of justice. In this case there was such a risk, and the judge's order stood. The judge need not restrict himself to the list of exceptions in the NSPCC case.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Thakur Persad Jaroo v Attorney-General of Trinidad and Tobago Times, 06 February 2002; Appeal No 54 of 2000; [2002] UKPC 5; [2002] 1 AC 871
4 Feb 2002
PC
Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Scott of Foscote, Sir Christopher Slade and Sir Andrew Leggatt
Constitutional, Police, Commonwealth
(Trinidad and Tobago) The appellant sought a declaration that his constitutional rights had been infringed. He had bought a car. When told it may be stolen, he took it to the police station, but after he heard nothing and it was not returned. He alleged that he had been deprived of his property in breach of the constitution. Only later did the police say it was still required as potential evidence. He claimed that the car had been held other than under due process. Held: To justify the continued detention of the car, the police had to show that there were reasonable grounds for its original and continuing retention. There were common law rights, by way of an originating motion, which the claimant could have exercised to make his complaint. He should take the method of constitutional challenge only in an exceptional case. This was not one, and the continued action was an abuse of process. Lord Hope of Craighead: "Their Lordships wish to emphasise that the originating motion procedure under section 14(1) is appropriate for use in cases where facts are not in dispute and questions of law only are in issue. It is wholly unsuitable in cases which depend for their decision on the resolution of disputes as to fact. Disputes of that kind must be resolved by using the procedures which are available in the ordinary courts under the common law."
Constitution of Trinidad and Tobago 4(a)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ PC ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Chief Constable of Cleveland Police v Mark Anthony McGrogan Gazette, 21 March 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 86
12 Feb 2002
CA
Lord Justice Mantell, And, Mr Justice Wall
Police, Torts - Other
The Chief Constable appealed a finding of false imprisonment of the claimant. He had once been properly arrested, but before he was freed, it was decided that he should be held for court and an information laid alleging breach of the peace. They purported to exercise the common law power to detain a person where it is believed that, having committed a breach of the peace, it was reasonably believed that a renewal was threatened. His detention was reviewed, but having been arrested early in the weekend, by Sunday, he might have been released. Held: A breach of the peace is not a criminal offence and the 1984 Act did not apply to detentions for a breach of the peace. Police constables have no special power of arrest for breach of the peace
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Delroy Samuel Denton [2002] EWCA Crim 272
15 Feb 2002
CACD
Lord Justice Mantell, Mr Justice Bennett, And, Mr Justice Mccombe
Criminal Practice, Police
The appellant was an illegal immigrant from Jamaica. He had been acting as a police informer. He came to be convicted of murder. He complained that his lawyers had not been told of his role, and the information he had supplied to the police about a relative of a prosecution witness, giving her a motive to lie. During intervals of the investigation process he was also in contact with his police handlers. There was a suggestion that an earlier discontinuance had been at the instigation of another police branch. The crown argued there could be no duty on the prosecution to disclose to the defence matters within the defendant's own knowledge. Held: The duty of disclosure is now as set out in the 1996 Act. However the evidence even without this witness, whose evidence had in any event largely been discredited, remained overwhelming. Appeal dismissed.
Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 3
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Nolan [2002] EWCA Crim 464
15 Feb 2002
CACD
Lord Justice Longmore Mr Justice Gibbs And The Recorder Of Leeds
Criminal Practice, Evidence, Police
The defendant was accused of murder. He had been identified by a witness who knew him, but the witness himself was murdered before the trial. The court allowed the prosecutor to read the deceased witness' statement. Another witness for whom an ID parade had been held had only seen the defendant from the rear, but the defence were not informed of this before the parade. Held: The scheme of the code required an identification parade if identification was disputed, but it was also required before a parade that the officer believed it would be useful, and the suspect consented. There could be no requirement to inform a suspect of the angle from which the suspect had been seen. The consent was not as to the identification, but the process of the parade, and therefore it did not affect the fairness of introducing the evidence. As to the admission of the evidence of the deceased witness, it was more than a fleeting glimpse, and no counsel would wish to cross examine such a witness in great depth. The conviction was safe.
Code of Practice for the Identification of Persons by Police Officers (Code D of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984) - Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 - Criminal Justice Act 1988 26
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Director of Public Prosecutions v Robertson Times, 13 March 2002; Gazette, 11 April 2002
4 Mar 2002
QBD

Criminal Practice, Road Traffic, Police
The motorist had been stopped. He had not failed the roadside breathalyzer test, but the officer continued and arrested him. He was acquitted. The prosecutor appealed. Held: The use of the section 6 breathalyzer procedure did not exclude the officer relying on the powers contained in section 4 of the Act. Where the officer believed an offence had been committed, he did have power to use that section. Accordingly the arrest was lawful, and the evidence subsequently acquired should not have been excluded.
Road Traffic Act 1988 4 6 - Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78(1)

 
Hooper and Another v Hampshire Constabulary and Another [2002] EWCA Civ 419
15 Mar 2002
CA

Police

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina (S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire; Regina (Marper) v Same Times, 04 April 2002; [2002] EWHC 478 (Admin); [2002] 1 WLR 3223
22 Mar 2002
Admn
Lord Justice Rose and Mr Justice Leveson
Criminal Practice, Police, Human Rights
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. 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.
European Convention on Human Rights 8.1 8.2 - Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 64(1A) - Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 82
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
The Police Complaints Authority and Others v Regina [2002] EWCA Civ 389; [2002] UKHRR 985
26 Mar 2002
CA
Lord Justice Simon Brown
Police, Human Rights, Litigation Practice
Simon Brown LJ said: "Given the PCA's right under section 76(7)(b) to such other information as they need for the purpose of reaching their section 76 decision, I am inclined to think that, if, after obtaining the complainant's comments upon any other witnesses' statements disclosed to him, they thought it necessary, they could require the investigation to be re-opened."
Police Act 1996 76(7)(b) 80(1)(a)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Brooks v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and others [2002] EWCA Civ 407; [2005] 1 WLR 1495
26 Mar 2002
CA
Lord Justice Clarke
Police, Negligence
The claimant was with Stephen Lawrence when he was murdered by a gang of white youths. He said that the police treatment of him exacerbated the post traumatic stress he suffered. Held: His claim failed. The allegations against the police might be factually accurate but disclosed no case in law.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Tucker, Regina (On the Application of) v National Crime Squad [2002] EWHC 832 (Admin); [2003] Po LR 1; [2002] ACD 80
12 Apr 2002
Admn
Harrison J
Police, Judicial Review
The claimant sought judicial review of a decision to terminate his secondment to the National Crime Squad. It was said that there had been concerns about his management skills after in investigation into drug related offences by co-officers. The decision was said to be unrelated but subject to matters protected by public interest immunity. Held: The decision was amenable to judicial review but that the Director General of the NCS had acted fairly notwithstanding the absence of reasons for the decision and the lack of opportunity for the Appellant to make representations.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Spencer v West Midlands Police [2002] EWCA Civ 649
24 Apr 2002
CA
Pill LJ. Chadwick LJ
Police, Torts - Other
Application for permission to appeal against award of damages for assault by police officers.
[ Bailii ]
 
Baker, Regina (on the Application of) v Devon and Cornwall Constabulary and Its Police Authority [2002] EWCA Civ 769
15 May 2002
CA
Dyson LJ
Police
Appeal against judicial review of decision of police authority that allegation of fraud did not merit being pursued.
[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis, ex parte Rottman; HL 16-May-2002 - Times, 21 May 2002; [2002] UKHL 20; [2002] 2 AC 692; [2002] ACD 69; [2002] 2 WLR 1315; [2002] 2 All ER 865; [2002] HRLR 32; 12 BHRC 329
 
Bedfordshire Police v Liversidge [2002] EWCA Civ 894; [2002] ICR 1135; [2002] Emp LR 998; [2002] IRLR 651; [2002] Po LR 146
24 May 2002
CA

Police, Discrimination

Race Relations Act 1976
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v McKoy Times, 17 June 2002
29 May 2002
CACD
Lord Justice Kay, Mr Justice Andrew Smith and Judge Colston, QC
Crime, Police
A police officer attended a domestic incident. Not intending to arrest the husband, he nevertheless placed his hand on the defendant to restrain him. The defendant, believing he was being arrested, struggled to escape and the officer was injured. Held: The judge had misdirected the jury. If, in fact, the restraint was unlawful, then the defendant was entitled to use reasonable force to escape from it. The fact that he believed that the restraint was a lawful arrest did not affect that right.

 
Regina (on the Application of the Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police) v Birmingham Justices Gazette, 11 July 2002; [2002] EWHC 1087 (Admin)
30 May 2002
Admn
Lord Justice Sedley, Poole
Police, Magistrates
The Chief Constable applied for anti-social behaviour orders, but the applications were made by his officers under purported delegated powers. The district judge rejected the applications saying that the power to make such an application could not be delegated. The Chief Constable appealed. Held: He did have a general power of delegation of powers given to him under statute. He remained answerable for his choice of appropriate officers to carry out tasks so delegated. The court however could not interfere in the absence of some irrationality or other manifest error.
courtcommentary.com "Carltona" principle does not depend on status of civil servants as alter ego of their minister. Chief Constable may discharge functions under ss (1) & (2) Crime and Disorder Act 1998 through any officer(s) judged suitable by him for whom he is answerable
Crime and Disorder Act 1998 81
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Kelly v South Yorkshire Police [2002] EWCA Civ 920
12 Jun 2002
CA

Police

[ Bailii ]
 
Armstrong v The United Kingdom Times, 06 August 2002; 48521/99; [2002] ECHR 594; 48521/99; [2002] ECHR 599
16 Jul 2002
ECHR

Human Rights, Police, Evidence
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8; Violation of Art. 13; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient
The applicant had pleaded guilty to charges after the court had rules as admissible evidence gathered by covert surveillance involving recording conversations in the home of a colleague. Authority had been granted by a chief superintendent and not by a chief constable, and on the grounds that no other form of surveillance would be adequate given the sophisticated nature of the defendants' alleged activities. At the time there was no statutory system to govern the use of such surveillance, and no means of redress. The interference with the right of privacy was not therefore in accordance with law, and was in breach of his human rights.
European Convention on Human Rights 8 13
[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
NTL Group Limited v Ipswich Crown Court Times, 06 August 2002; Gazette, 08 August 2002
22 Jul 2002
QBD
Lord Woolf, Lord Chief Justice and Mr Justice Curtis
Information, Police
The applicant operated an e-mail system. E-mails would normally be deleted after being read. The police sought an order under the 1984 Act for certain emails to be retained in connection with an investigation. The applicant argued that this would put them in conflict with the 2000 Act, by requiring them to intercept the e-mails. Held: Parliament could not have meant the 2000 Act to defeat the powers under the 1984 Act. No damage would be done, since the order sought retention only, and a further order would be required before any emails were disclosed. The police had the necessary power to make the request, and the applicant would not be in breach in complying with it.
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 9 Sch 1 - Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 1 2(7) 2(8)


 
 NTL Group Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v S Constabulary; Admn 22-Jul-2002 - [2002] EWHC 1585 (Admin); [2003] QB 131; [2002] 3 WLR 1173

 
 Regina v Maynard, Dudley etc; CACD 31-Jul-2002 - [2002] EWCA Crim 1942
 
Bloggs 61, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Unreported 31 July 2002
31 Jul 2002
Admn
Ousely J
Prisons, Police

1 Citers


 
Ashleigh-Nicholson v Staffordshire Police and Another [2002] EWCA Civ 1300
23 Aug 2002
CA
Aldous LJ, Keene LJ
Police

1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina (on the application of S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, Regina (Marper) v Same Times, 03 October 2002; Gazette, 17 October 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
12 Sep 2002
CA
Lord Woolf, Waller LJ, Sedley LJ
Police, Human Rights
The applicants had been charged with offences, but later acquitted. On arrest they had had DNA samples taken, and the details added to the national DNA database. The police refused to remove the records after the acquittals. Held: 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.”
European Convention on Human Rights Art 8.1 Art 14 - Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 64
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Masters v Sussex Chief Constable [2002] EWCA Civ 1482
3 Oct 2002
CA

Police, Torts - Other
Appeal against finding of misfeasance.
[ Bailii ]
 
Clive Williams v The Devon and Cornwall Constabulary, The Devon and Cornwall Constabulary Widows Orphans and Compassionate Fund EAT/283/00
14 Oct 2002
EAT
His Hon Judge J Burke QC
Discrimination, Police
EAT Race Discrimination - Victimisation

 
Akenzua, Coy (Administrators of the Estate of Marcia Zena Laws (Deceased)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, the Comissioner of Police for the Metropolis Times, 30 October 2002; Gazette, 05 December 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 1470
23 Oct 2002
CA
Simon Brown, Sedley Scott Baker, LLJ
Torts - Other, Police
The claimant sought damages for misfeasance in public office. The defendant had been involved in the release of a person known to be violent from custody, and where he had subsequently killed a member of the claimant's family. The family appealed a strike out of their claim following the decision in Three Rivers. Held Following that case, and in cases where the result was personal injury, it was no longer necessary to allege that the victim was to be identifiable, either himself, or as a member of an identifiable group, before the act complained of as a misfeasance. It was sufficient to aver that the person could not be identified until the act of violence. What mattered was showing that if released it was predictable that the person released might well kill someone. It remained necessary to show that the actual violence inflicted was of a kind with that which might be known to the defendant.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]

 
 Mastromatteo v Italy; ECHR 24-Oct-2002 - 37703/97; [2002] ECHR 694

 
 Allan v The United Kingdom; ECHR 5-Nov-2002 - Times, 12 November 2002; 48539/99; [2002] ECHR 697; [2002] ECHR 702
 
A v Chief Constable of the West Yorkshire Police and Another Times, 14 November 2002; Gazette, 09 January 2003; [2002] EWCA Civ 1584; [2003] ICR 161
5 Nov 2002
CA
Kennedy, Buxton, Keene LJJ
Discrimination, Police, Employment, European, Human Rights
The appellant had undergone a male to female sex change, but was refused employment by the respondent before the Human Rights Act came into effect. Held: Although the Human Rights Act could not apply, the act was in breach of the Equal Treatment Directive and discrimination. The 1999 regulations were incompatible with the provisions of the Directive. The respondent said that it was a requirement of the job that an officer be ready to search a person of the same sex, under the 1984 Act. Following Goodwin, it was no longer permissible to treat the applicant other than as a female. It is now necessary to apply the law as developed by the European convention jurisprudence. It was necessary to decide first what is "the appellant's legal gender". There had been gender reassignment surgery and the Court concluded that the appellant had become female.
Equal Treatment Directive (76/207/EEC) (OJ 1976 L39/40) - Sex Discrimination Act 1975 Part II - Sex Discrimination (Gender Re-Assignment) Regulations 1999 (1999 No 1102) - Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 54
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Adlington v Metropolitan Police Authority [2002] EWCA Civ 1712
8 Nov 2002
CA

Police, Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Cronin, Regina (on The Application of) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police and Another Times, 28 November 2002; Gazette, 30 January 2003; [2002] EWHC 2568 (Admin); [2003] 1 WLR 752
20 Nov 2002
Admn
Lord Woolf of Barnes LCJ, Hallett, Stanley Burnton JJ
Magistrates, Police, Human Rights, Magistrates
The applicant had had his premises searched. He sought to challenge the basis on which search warrant had been granted. He argued that under the Convention, it was necessary for the magistrates to provide a written record of the reasons for granting the warrant. Held: Where the information laid was itself sufficient to account for the warrant a magistrate could be assumed to have acted upon it, and no further reasons were required to be noted. Warrants were often issued under conditions where such a requirement would be unreasonable. Here the magistrate would only have repeated the contents of the information. Where a magistrate elicited further information from the officer which affected the decision, it was necessary for that to be recorded.
Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 23(3) - European Convention on Human Rights Art 6 Art 8 - Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 8 15 16
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
O'Driscoll v The Secretary of State for the Home Department, The Metropolitan Police Commissioner [2002] EWHC 2477 (Admin)
22 Nov 2002
Admn
Lord Justice Kennedy, Mr Justice Pitchers
Police, Judicial Review

[ Bailii ]
 
Hendricks v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis Times, 06 December 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 1686; [2003] IRLR 96; [2003] 1 All ER 654; [2002] All ER (D) 407; [2003] ICR 530
27 Nov 2002
CA
Judge, Mummery, May LJJ
Discrimination, Police, Employment
The appellant appealed a finding of the Employment Appeal Tribunal against her. She had complained of sex and race discrimination. She alleged that the Tribunal had concentrated on the issues of policy within the respondent police force. Held: The true issues were how in fact the complainant had been treated, and the Tribunal had concentrated too much on what were the policies of the Respondent. Attempts should be made to concentrate on the most recent and most serious allegations to limit the scope of the hearings.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina (U) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis; Regina (R) v Chief Constable of Durham Constabulary Times, 10 December 2002; [2003] 1 WLR 897; [2002] EWHC 2486 (Admin)
29 Nov 2002
Admn
Latham LJ, Field J
Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights, Police
In each case the youth aged 15 had been given a warning after admitting a sexual assault, and a decision had been made not to prosecute. On accepting the warnings, they had then been required to place their names on the sex offenders register, but this had not been explained to them when asked about accepting the warning. Held: In one case, the acceptance of guilt was equivocal in any event. The placing of a name on the sex offender's register added a public dimension to the consequences of accepting guilt, but without the putative offender having the opportunity of a trial. To have this happen without the consequences being explained, and by an administrative procedure was unfair. Held: The warning procedure was not one requiring the consent of the youth (as opposed to a caution of an adult)
European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 - Crime and Disorder Act 1998 65 66
[ Bailii ]
 
Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police v Earl Gideon Foster Hepburn [2002] EWCA Civ 1841; Times, 19 December 2002; [2002] All ER (D) 214
13 Dec 2002
CA
Lord Justice Brooke, Lord Justice Sedley, Lord Justice Tuckey
Police, Torts - Other, Litigation Practice
The claimant sought damages from the police. They had executed a search warrant, and one officer detained the claimant during the raid. Held: A person who mistakenly restrained an individual in the mistaken belief that he had been lawfully arrested is liable for trespass to the person. The terms of the warrant had to be carefully applied. The warrant provided for a search of the premises, but included no power to detain a person found on the premises. A citizen's freedom of movement is inviolable save under express power: "honest belief in a non-existent state of affairs does not excuse a trespass to the person". An obstruction could give a power of arrest, but there was no implied power as suggested by the Chief Constable. Late amendments of the sort allowed here should be discouraged.
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
R Cruickshank Limited v The Chief Constable of Kent County Constabulary Times, 27 December 2002; [2002] EWCA Civ 1840
13 Dec 2002
CA
Lord Justice Brooke, Lord Justice Sedley, Lord Justice Tuckey
Police, Torts - Other
The claimant had sought damages from the defendant for unlawful interference with contractual relations, and for misfeasance in public office. It now appealed against an order striking out its claim. It claimed that the police had unlawfully abused their power causing it damage to its goodwill and business. Held: Three Rivers established two forms of claim for public misfeasance, acts of bad faith targeted against the claimant, and acting knowingly in excess of his powers, and causing damage to the claimant. Here the alternative claim of interfering in contractual relations was hopeless, following Lhonro. It would be wrong to water down the requirements of public misfeasance by reference to an economic tort. The case for public misfeasance was not unfit for trial, and should be allowed to proceed.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]

 
 Miller Gardner Solicitors, Regina (on the Application of) v Minshull Street Crown Court; Admn 20-Dec-2002 - [2002] EWHC 3077 (Admin)
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.