The Chief Constable appealed a finding of false imprisonment. The claimant had been arrested, but later the charges were dismissed. The jury found on the trial for malicious prosecution that the officers had not believed the truth of the allegations they had made. The plaintiff had insulted the officer and later apologised. The defendant appealed saying the jury’s verdict was inconsistent, and the judge’s direction inadequate.
Held: The jury’s verdict was not inconsistent. Though the plaintiff had misbehaved, the officers had ‘gilded the lily’ and thrown the book at him, and the judge’s approach on that point had been correct. However the judge had failed to draw distinctions which were necessary regarding the connection between the lawfulness of the arrest and later the reasonable and probable cause for the charges laid, and the honest or other belief of the officers, and later again as to damages. The jury’s verdict must be set aside.
Judges:
Lord Justice Beldam, Lord Justice Ward, Lord Justice Schiemann
Citations:
[1996] EWCA Civ 709
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Glinski v McIver HL 1962
The court considered the tort of malicious prosecution when committed by a police officer, saying ‘But these cases must be carefully watched so as to see that there really is some evidence from his conduct that he knew it was a groundless charge.’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Police, Torts – Other
Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.140576
