Bahamas

Citations:

[2017] UKPC 38

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Torts – Other, Police

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.599997

The claimant appealed against rejection of his allegations of torts associated with his arrest under the 2006 Act, but which had not led to any prosecution.

Judges:

Gross, Simon LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 1531

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Fraud Act 2006

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 30 March 2022; Ref: scu.596094

The claimant sought damages, alleging wrongful arrest and false imprisonment.

Judges:

Stuart-Smith J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 2140 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 29 March 2022; Ref: scu.593625

Claim for damages for assault during arrest. It became necessary for the claimant to issue proceedings very quickly after the decision in Hoare, and he failed to obtain consent under the 2003 Act before issuing his claim.
Held: The requirement to obtain consent before issuing proceedings was procedural only.

Judges:

Owen J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1081 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 2003 329

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Adorian v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis CA 23-Jan-2009
The claimant received injuries when arrested. He was later convicted of resisting arrest. The defendant relied on section 329 of the 2003 Act. The claimant said that the force used against him was grossly disproportionate. The commissioner appealed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.268688

Judges:

Rafferty, McFarlane, Hamblen LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 86

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 31 January 2022; Ref: scu.575333

The deceased was shot by police officers raiding his flat in 1998. The claimants sought damages for his estate. They had succeeded in claiming damages for false imprisonment, but now appealed dismissal of their claim for damages for assault and misfeasance. The judge below had accepted that the officer had acted in self-defence, and entered summary judgment against the claimants.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The burden of proving self-defence is on the defendant. The principles of the criminal law and the civil law have diverged in this area. In a civil case the defendant has to show that his mistaken belief is genuine, not that it was reasonable: ‘i) In criminal proceedings the burden of negativing self-defence is on the prosecution. By contrast, in civil proceedings the burden is on the defendant to establish self-defence.
ii) In criminal proceedings a defendant who mistakenly but honestly believes that it is necessary to act in self-defence is entitled to be judged on the basis that his mistaken belief is true. By contrast, in civil proceedings, his belief must be both honestly and reasonably held.
iii) In both criminal and civil proceedings, action taken in self-defence must be reasonable but, in judging what is reasonable, the court must have regard to all the circumstances of the case, including the fact that the action may have to be taken in the heat of the moment.’
As to the allegations of misfeasance in the coduct of the investigation, the claimants did not need to establish any duty of care to them. The allegations were capable of supporting a claim, and the trial should proceed.

Judges:

Sir Anthony Clarke MR, Auld LJ, Arden LJ

Citations:

[2007] 1 WLR 398, Times 30-Aug-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 1085

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Fatal Accidents Act 1976, Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Watkins v Secretary of State for The Home Departmentand others CA 20-Jul-2004
The claimant complained that prison officers had abused the system of reading his solicitor’s correspondence whilst he was in prison. The defendant argued that there was no proof of damage.
Held: Proof of damage was not necessary in the tort . .
Cited – Watkins v Home Office and others HL 29-Mar-2006
The claimant complained of misfeasance in public office by the prisons for having opened and read protected correspondence whilst he was in prison. The respondent argued that he had suffered no loss. The judge had found that bad faith was . .
Cited – Cope v Sharpe (No 2) CA 1912
The court considered defences to assault; whether the defendant was justified in doing certain acts of trespass on the plaintiff’s land for the purpose of preventing heath fire and consequent loss and damage to the property of the defendant’s . .
Cited – Dumbell v Roberts CA 1944
The court discussed the nature of reasonable grounds for suspicion for an arrest. The threshold for the existence of reasonable grounds for suspicion is low, and the requirement is limited. Scott LJ said: ‘The protection of the public is safeguarded . .
Cited – Cresswell v Sirl CA 1948
The defendant shot and killed the plaintiff’s dog. The plaintiff claimed damages for trespass to property, the property being the dog. The defence was that the defendant was justified in killing the dog because it was threatening his sheep.
Cited – Palmer v The Queen PC 23-Nov-1970
It is a defence in criminal law to a charge of assault if the defendant had an honest belief that he was going to be attacked and reacted with proportionate force: ‘If there has been an attack so that defence is reasonably necessary, it should be . .
Cited – Chan Kau v The Queen PC 1955
In a criminal trial for assault, once the evidence is shown to have raised a possible defense of self-defense, the burden is on the prosecution to prove that the defendant intended to apply unlawful force to the victim: ‘Even under the common law . .
Cited – Dallison v Caffery CACD 1965
It is for the detaining authority to justify all periods of detention.
The court described the common law duty on a prosecutor to disclose material. Lord Denning MR said: ‘The duty of a prosecuting counsel or solicitor, as I have always . .
Cited – Regina v Lobell CCA 11-Mar-1957
The court considered the different standards of proof required for civil and criminal accusations of assault.
Held: Appeal allowed. The onus of proving self-defence as a defence to murder, or a defence of ‘killing se defendendo’, was on the . .
Cited – Freeman v Home Office (No 2) CA 1984
A prisoner brought an action in battery against a prison doctor for administering drugs to him by injection. He argued that he was incapable of consenting to the procedure because he was in the defendant’s custody. . He failed at trial.
Held: . .
Cited – Bici and Bici v Ministry of Defence QBD 7-Apr-2004
Claimants sought damages for personal injuries incurred when, in Pristina, Kosovo and during a riot, British soldiers on a UN peacekeeping expedition fired on a car.
Held: The incidents occurred in the course of peace-keeping duties. It was . .
Cited – Parkinson v St James and Seacroft University Hospital NHS Trust CA 11-Apr-2001
A mother had undergone a negligent sterilisation, and in due course she gave birth to a disabled child.
Held: The right to bodily integrity is the first and most important of the interests protected by the law of tort. The cases saying that . .
Cited – Wilson v Pringle CA 26-Mar-1986
Two boys played in a school yard. D said he had pulled a bag from the other’s shoulder as an ordinary act of horseplay. The plaintiff said it was a battery.
Held: The defendant’s appeal against summary judgment was allowed. A claim of trespass . .
Cited – F v West Berkshire Health Authority HL 17-Jul-1990
The parties considered the propriety of a sterilisation of a woman who was, through mental incapacity, unable to give her consent.
Held: The appeal succeeded, and the operation would be lawful if the doctor considered it to be in the best . .
Cited – Regina v Williams CACD 1986
The defendant was charged with threatening to kill.
Held: Evidence of previous threatening and violent conduct of Williams towards the victim was rightly admitted to establish an intention on the part of the defendant that the victim should . .
Cited – Blackburn and Others v Bowering and Another CA 5-Nov-1993
It was self defence if the defendant honestly believes the victim was not an officer of court. The issue was the genuineness of the belief, not its reasonableness. . .
Cited – Beckford v The Queen PC 15-Jun-1987
(Jamaica) Self defence permits a defendant to use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances as he honestly believed them to be. ‘If then a genuine belief, albeit without reasonable grounds, is a defence to rape because it negatives the . .
Cited – Regina v Weston 1879
. .
Cited – Regina v Chisam CCA 1963
A defendant’s belief founding a plea of self defence must be both honest and reasonable. A sufficient justification was established if the accused genuinely believed on reasonable grounds that a relative or friend was in imminent danger of injury, . .
Cited – Regina v Fennell CACD 1971
A father was accused of assaulting a police constable in order to release his son from custody. He pleaded self defence, saying that he had believed the arrest unlawful.
Held: The defence failed. A defendant seeking to justify an assault, . .
Cited – New Orleans and Northeastern Railroad Company v Jopes 1891
(United States Supreme Court) The test of necessity as a defence to an accusation of assault is one of the actual presence of imminent danger and a reasonably apparent necessity of taking such action as was taken: ‘We hold, therefore, that the . .
Cited – Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police v Hepburn CA 13-Dec-2002
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 . .
Cited – Lonhro Plc and Others v Fayed and Others (No 5) CA 6-Oct-1993
The plaintiff sought to amend a conspiracy claim, based on arrangements to publish defamatory statements, by adding a claim for damage to reputation and feelings.
Held: Such a claim could not be made in conspiracy. A Plaintiff’s motives in . .
Cited – Regina v Morgan HL 30-Apr-1975
The defendants appealed against their convictions for rape, denying mens rea and asserting a belief (even if mistaken) that the victim had consented.
Held: For a defence of mistake to succeed, the mistake must have been honestly made and need . .
Cited – Albert v Lavin HL 3-Dec-1981
An off duty and out of uniform police officer attempted to restrain the defendant jumping ahead of a bus queue. The defendant struggled, and continued to do so even after being told that of the officer’s status. He said he had not believed that he . .
Cited – Regina v Kimber CACD 1983
For mens rea, it is the defendant’s belief, not the grounds on which it is based, which goes to negative the intent. The guilty state of mind was the intent to use personal violence to a woman without her consent. If the defendant did not so intend, . .
Cited – Regina v Williams (Gladstone) CACD 28-Nov-1983
The defendant believed that the person whom he assaulted was unlawfully assaulting a third party. That person was a police officer, who said he was arresting the other, but did not show his warrant card.
Held: The court considered the issue of . .
Cited – Three Rivers District Council and Others v Governor and Company of The Bank of England (No 3) HL 22-Mar-2001
Misfeasance in Public Office – Recklessness
The bank sought to strike out the claim alleging misfeasance in public office in having failed to regulate the failed bank, BCCI.
Held: Misfeasance in public office might occur not only when a company officer acted to injure a party, but also . .
Cited – Regina v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police Ex Parte Wiley; Other Similar HL 14-Jul-1994
Statements made to the police to support a complaint against the police, were not part of the class of statements which could attract public interest immunity, and were therefore liable to disclosure.
Lord Woolf said: ‘The recognition of a new . .
Cited – Raja v Van Hoogstraten ChD 19-Dec-2005
Damages were claimed after claimant alleged involvement by the defendant in the murder of the deceased. The defendant had been tried and acquitted of murder and manslaughter, but the allegation was now pursued. The defendant had since failed to . .
Cited – Taylor v Anderton (Police Complaints Authority Intervening) CA 19-Jan-1995
Reports, which had been prepared for the purposes of a police complaint procedure, could be entitled to protection from disclosure under a public interest immunity certificate. The court also considered the relationship between the documentation and . .
Cited – In re McKerr (Northern Ireland) HL 11-Mar-2004
The deceased had been shot by soldiers of the British Army whilst in a car in Northern Ireland. The car was alleged to have ‘run’ a checkpoint. The claimants said the investigation, now 20 years ago, had been inadequate. The claim was brought under . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Ashley and Another v Chief Constable of Sussex Police HL 23-Apr-2008
The claimants sought to bring an action for damages after a family member suspected of dealing drugs, was shot by the police. At the time he was naked. The police officer had been acquitted by a criminal court of murder. The chief constable now . .
See Also – Ashley and Another v Sussex Police (1) QBD 19-Dec-2008
The court considered the terms under which copies of the Moonstone report could be redacted and disclosed. . .
See Also – Ashley and Another v Sussex Police (2) QBD 19-Dec-2008
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Police

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.243977

The claimant sought judicial review of a decision to search him whilst travelling to a public protest in London. A previous demonstration involving this group had resulted in criminal damage, but neither the claimant nor his companions were found to be in possession of any materials for causing damage. The claimant said that the officer had no proper grounds of suspicion to justify the search.
Held: The claim failed.
McCombe J said: ‘The rights of expression and of assembly protected by the Convention are indeed precious in a democratic society. However, there is a significant danger of the law becoming ‘over precious’, in a rather different sense, about minimal intrusions into privacy and alleged indirect infringements of the rights of privacy, assembly and expression which are the price today of participation in numerous lawful activities conducted in large groups of people. I do not forget that many such activities, such as travel and attendance at sporting and entertainment events are not rights protected by the Convention. I also note the point made by the European Court in Gillan that persons attending private events and those travelling by air can be taken to consent to such searches. Expression and assembly, like those other lawful activities, are nonetheless encouraged and fostered, rather than hindered, by sensible and good natured controls by the authorities and the sensible and good natured acceptance of such controls by members of the public.’

Hallett LJ, McCombe J
[2011] EWHC 2818 (QB)
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 8 10 11, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 1(3)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – A (A juvenile) v The Queen 1978
Spitting on a police officer’s coat was held to be such a minor ‘damage’ to the coat as not to be criminal damage within the meaning of the 1971 Act at all. Though spitting on a raincoat which was likely to be cleaned easily with a damp cloth did . .
Cited – Castorina v Chief Constable of Surrey CA 10-Jun-1988
Whether an officer had reasonable cause to arrest somebody without a warrant depended upon an objective assessment of the information available to him, and not upon his subjective beliefs. The court had three questions to ask (per Woolf LJ): ‘(a) . .
Cited – O’Hara v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary HL 21-Nov-1996
Second Hand Knowledge Supports Resaobnable Belief
The plaintiff had been arrested on the basis of the 1984 Act. The officer had no particular knowledge of the plaintiff’s involvement, relying on a briefing which led to the arrest.
Held: A reasonable suspicion upon which an arrest was founded . .
Cited – Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Raissi CA 12-Nov-2008
The Commissioner appealed against an award of damages for false imprisonment. The claimant had been arrested shortly after a terrorist attack. The judge had held that they had no reasonable belief of his involvement. The Commissioner did not now . .
Cited – Cumming and others v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police CA 17-Dec-2003
The six claimants sought damages for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment. Each had been arrested on an officer’s suspicion. They operated CCTV equipment, and it appeared that tapes showing the commission of an offence had been tampered with. Each . .
Cited – Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others HL 8-Mar-2006
In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the . .
Cited – Gillan and Quinton v The United Kingdom ECHR 12-Jan-2010
The claimants had been stopped by the police using powers in the 2000 Act. They were going to a demonstration outside an arms convention. There was no reason given for any suspicion that the searches were needed.
Held: The powers given to the . .
Cited – Tabernacle v Secretary of State for Defence CA 5-Feb-2009
The claimant sought judicial review to test the validity of the bye-laws which prohibited them from camping on public land to support their demonstration.
Held: The bye-laws violated the claimant’s right to freedom of assembly and of . .
Cited – Gillan, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Another HL 8-Mar-2006
The defendants said that the stop and search powers granted under the 2000 Act were too wide, and infringed their human rights. Each had been stopped when innocently attending demonstrations in London, and had been effectively detained for about . .
Cited – The Sunday Times v The United Kingdom (No 2) ECHR 26-Nov-1991
Any prior restraint on freedom of expression calls for the most careful scrutiny. ‘Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society subject to paragraph (2) of Article 10. It is applicable not only to . .
Cited – Laporte, Regina (on the application of ) v Chief Constable of Gloucestershire HL 13-Dec-2006
The claimants had been in coaches being driven to take part in a demonstration at an air base. The defendant police officers stopped the coaches en route, and, without allowing any number of the claimants to get off, returned the coaches to London. . .
Cited – Hashman and Harrup v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Nov-1999
The defendants had been required to enter into a recognisance to be of good behaviour after disrupting a hunt by blowing of a hunting horn. They were found to have unlawfully caused danger to the dogs. Though there had been no breach of the peace, . .

Cited by:
Cited – Marshall v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 17-Jun-2015
A car was seen speeding. Husband and wife each said that they did not know who was driving it in response to notices requiring that information. Mrs M now appealed against her conviction under section 172. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 12 January 2022; Ref: scu.448160

The claimant taxi driver complained of misfeasance in public office in the way the defendant had responded to the several calls for assistance made by him to the police.
Held: His appeal against the striking out failed. The damages pleaded were nominal at best and did not justify the expense of a trial. Transient physical symptoms caused by anxiety or stress did not amount either to psychiatric or physical injury and were insufficient to constitute material damage, an essential ingredient of the tort of misfeasance in public office. The claimant had other and more appropriate remedies.

Sir Anthony Clarke, Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice Maurice Kay and Lord Justice Stanley Burnton
[2008] EWCA Civ 1205
Bailii, Times
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – McLoughlin v O’Brian HL 6-May-1982
The plaintiff was the mother of a child who died in an horrific accident, in which her husband and two other children were also injured. She was at home at the time of the accident, but went to the hospital immediately when she had heard what had . .
Cited – Watkins v Home Office and others HL 29-Mar-2006
The claimant complained of misfeasance in public office by the prisons for having opened and read protected correspondence whilst he was in prison. The respondent argued that he had suffered no loss. The judge had found that bad faith was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Police

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.277383

The plaintiff had been falsely reported to the police by the defendant, a neighbour, for indecent exposure whilst standing on a ladder in his garden. He had been arrested and charged, but at a hearing before the Magistrates’ Court, the Crown Prosecution Service offered no evidence, and the charge was dismissed. He appealed against the decision that he could not claim in malicious prosecution.
Held: The appeal succeeded, though there was no English authority on the topic. Since the facts relating to the alleged offence were solely within the complainant’s knowledge, and that as a practical matter the police officer who laid the information could not have exercised any independent discretion, the complainant could be sued for malicious prosecution, and upheld an award of damages against her. The complainant had ‘in substance procured the prosecution’. The police officer to whom the complaint was made had no way of testing the truthfulness of the accusation.
The tort of malicious prosecution can be committed by a informer knowingly and maliciously laying a false complaint to the police. The actions taken by the police are insufficient intervention to interfere with that liability. To ground a claim for malicious prosecution a plaintiff must prove (1) that the law was set in motion against him on a criminal charge; (2) that the prosecution was determined in his favour; (3) that it was without reasonable and proper cause, and (4) that it was malicious.
Lord Keith said: ‘It is common ground that the ingredients of the tort of malicious prosecution are correctly stated in Clerk and Lindsell on Torts ‘In action of malicious prosecution the plaintiff must show first that he was prosecuted by the defendant, that is to say, that the law was set in motion against him on a criminal charge; secondly, that the prosecution was determined in his favour; and thirdly, that it was without reasonable and probable cause; fourthly, that it was malicious.” and ‘The essential feature of malicious prosecution is an abuse of the process of the Court. If that has occurred it is immaterial that the abuse has involved giving evidence in a court of law.’
and ‘Where an individual falsely and maliciously gives a police officer information indicating that some person is guilty of a criminal offence and states that he is willing to give evidence in court of the matters in question, it is properly to be inferred that he desires and intends that the person he names should be prosecuted. Where the circumstances are such that the facts relating to the alleged offence can be within the knowledge only of the complainant, as was the position here, then it becomes virtually impossible for the police officer to exercise any independent discretion or judgment, and if a prosecution is instituted by the police officer the proper view of the matter is that the prosecution has been procured by the complainant.’
Lord Keith also said: ‘Analogies were sought to be drawn with the immunity afforded in respect of evidence given in a court of law, which extends also to statements made to solicitors engaged in preparation for pending proceedings: Watson v M’Ewan . . No such analogy is, however, helpful. The essential feature of malicious prosecution is an abuse of the process of the court. If that has occurred it is immaterial that the abuse has involved giving evidence in a court of law. That was held in Roy v Prior [1971] A.C. 470 in relation to an action for malicious arrest . .
Similar considerations apply to statements made to the police under circumstances where the maker falls to be regarded as having in substance procured the prosecution. There is no way of testing the truthfulness of such statements before the prosecution is brought. To deny any remedy to a person whose liberty has been interfered with as a result of unfounded and malicious accusations in such circumstances would constitute a serious denial of justice.’

Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Lloyd, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Steyn
Times 14-Jul-1995, Gazette 06-Sep-1995, Independent 19-Jul-1995, [1996] AC 74, [1995] 3 WLR 318, [1995] 3 All ER 559, [1995] UKHL 25
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Roy v Prior HL 1970
The court considered an alleged tort of maliciously procuring an arrest. The plaintiff had been arrested under a bench warrant issued as a result of evidence given by the defendant. He sued the defendant for damages for malicious arrest.
Held: . .
Appeal from – Martin v Watson CA 26-Jan-1994
The claimant sought damages for malicious prosecution, saying that the defendant had made a complaint to the police knowing it to be false that the claimant had indecently exposed himself. Acting on the complaint the police had arrested and charged . .
Cited – Watson v M’Ewan HL 1905
A claim was brought against a medical witness in respect of statements made in preparation of a witness statement and similar statements subsequently made in court. The appellant was a doctor of medicine who had been retained by the respondent in . .

Cited by:
Cited – Keegan and Others v Chief Constable of Merseyside CA 3-Jul-2003
The police had information suggesting (wrongly) that a fugitive resided at an address. An armed raid followed, and the claimant occupant sought damages.
Held: The tort of malicious procurement of a search warrant required it to be established . .
Cited – Sinclair v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire and British Telecommunications Plc CA 12-Dec-2000
The claimant had been prosecuted, but the charge was dismissed as an abuse of process. He now appealed a strike out of his civil claim for damages for malicious prosecution.
Held: The appeal failed. The decision to dismiss the criminal charge . .
Cited – Mahon, Kent v Dr Rahn, Biedermann, Haab-Biedermann, Rahn, and Bodmer (a Partnership) (No 2) CA 8-Jun-2000
The defendant’s lawyers wrote to a financial services regulatory body investigating the possible fraudulent conduct of the plaintiff’s stockbroking firm. The letter was passed to the Serious Fraud Office who later brought criminal proceedings . .
Cited – Westcott v Westcott QBD 30-Oct-2007
The claimant said that his daughter in law had defamed him. She answered that the publication was protected by absolute privilege. She had complained to the police that he had hit her and her infant son.
Held: ‘the process of taking a witness . .
Cited – Mckie vStrathclyde Joint Police Board and others SCS 24-Dec-2003
. .
Cited – Gregory v Portsmouth City Council CA 5-Nov-1997
The plaintiff councillor had been disciplined by the defendant for allegations. The findings were later overturned, and he now sought damages alleging malicious prosecution.
Held: The categories of malicious prosecution are closed, and it was . .
Leading Case – Westcott v Westcott CA 15-Jul-2008
The defendant was the claimant’s daughter in law. In the course of a bitter divorce she made allegations to the police which were investigated but did not lead to a prosecution. The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim for defamation on the . .
Cited – Alford v Cambridgeshire Police CA 24-Feb-2009
The claimant police officer had been held after an accident when he was in a high speed pursuit of a vehicle into the neighbouring respondent’s area. The prosecution had been discontinued, and he now appealed against rejection of his claims for . .
Cited – Hunt v AB CA 22-Oct-2009
The claimant sought damages from a woman in malicious prosecution, saying that she had made a false allegation of rape against him. He had served two years in prison.
Held: The claim failed. A complainant is not a prosecutor, and is not liable . .
Cited – The Ministry of Justice (Sued As The Home Office) v Scott CA 20-Nov-2009
The claimant had been falsely accused of assault by five prison officers. The defendant appealed against a refusal to strike out a claim of of malicious prosecution.
Held: Proceedings for malicious prosecution cannot be regarded as being . .
Cited – Silcott v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis CA 24-May-1996
The claimant had been convicted of the murder of PC Blakelock. The only substantial evidence was in the form of the notes of interview he said were fabricated by senior officers. His eventual appeal on this basis was not resisted. He now appealed . .
Cited – Gregory v Portsmouth City Council HL 10-Feb-2000
Disciplinary proceedings had been taken by the local authority against Mr Gregory, a council member, after allegations had been made that he had failed to declare conflicts of interest, and that he had used confidential information to secure a . .
Cited – Howarth v Gwent Constabulary and Another QBD 1-Nov-2011
The claimant alleged malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office against the defendant. He had been charged with perverting the course of justice. He had worked for a firm of solicitors specialising in defending road traffic prosecutions. . .
Cited – Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis v Copeland CA 22-Jul-2014
The defendant appealed against the award of damages for assault, false imprisonment and malicious prosection, saying that the question posed for the jury were misdirections, and that the jury’s decision was perverse. The claimant was attending the . .
Cited – Crawford v Jenkins CA 24-Jul-2014
The parties had divorced but acrimony continued. H now complained of his arrests after allegations from his former wife that he had breached two orders. He had been released and no charges followed. The court had ruled that W’s complaints were . .
Cited – CXZ v ZXC QBD 26-Jun-2020
Malicious Prosecution needs court involvement
W had made false allegations against her husband of child sex abuse to police. He sued in malicious prosecution. She applied to strike out, and he replied saying that as a developing area of law a strike out was inappropriate.
Held: The claim . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Police

Leading Case

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.83445

Police may enter private property to keep peace

Police officers went to a hall where a public meeting which had been extensively advertised was about to take place; the police sergeant in charge of the party was refused admission to the hall but insisted on entering and remaining there during the meeting. The question arose as to whether the police were entitled to take that course.
Held: The English authorities were expressed in very wide terms. A police officer has a duty to prevent any breach of the peace which has occurred or which he reasonably apprehends will occur. Pursuant to this duty he is entitled to enter onto and remain on private property without the consent of the occupier or owner.
Avory J said that ‘[t]o prevent . . a breach of the peace the police were entitled to enter and to remain on the premises’ and ‘I cannot doubt that he has a right to break in to prevent an affray which he has reasonable cause to suspect may take place on private premises.’
Lord Hewart CJ said that ‘a police officer has ex virtute officii full right to so act when he has reasonable ground for believing that an offence is imminent or is likely to be committed’ and ‘I think that there is quite sufficient ground for the proposition that it is part of the preventive power, and, therefore, part of the preventive duty, of the police, in cases where there are such reasonable grounds of apprehension [of a misdemeanour or breach of the peace], to enter and remain on private premises. It goes without saying that the powers and duties of the police are directed, not to the interests of the police, but to the protection and welfare of the public’ and ‘It is elementary that a good defence to an action for trespass is to show that the act complained of was done by authority of law, or by leave and licence.’
Lawrence J said: ‘If a constable in the execution of his duty to preserve the peace is entitled to commit an assault, it appears to me that he is equally entitled to commit a trespass.’

Avory J, Lord Hewart CJ, Lawrence J
[1935] 2 KB 249, 30 Cox CC 265 KB
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – McLeod, Mealing (deceased) v Metropolitan Police Commissioner CA 3-Feb-1994
The plaintiff appealed against the dismissal of her claims for trespass and breach of duty by the defendant’s officers. In divorce proceedings, she had been ordered to return certain household goods to her husband, but had failed yet to do so. The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.471227

Arrest need not involve Physically Taking Hold

An arrest may be constituted when any form of words is used or possibly conduct deployed which is calculated to bring to the suspect’s notice, and does so, that he is under compulsion, and he thereafter submits to that compulsion.
Lord Parker CJ said: ‘There are a number of cases, both ancient and modern, as to what constitutes an arrest, and whereas there was a time when it was held that there could be no lawful arrest unless there was an actual seizing or touching, it is quite clear that that is no longer the law. There may be an arrest by mere words, by saying ‘I arrest you’ without any touching, provided, of course, that the defendant submits and goes with the police officer. Equally it is clear … that an arrest is constituted when any form of words is used which in the circumstances of the case were calculated to bring to the defendant’s notice, and did bring to the defendant’s notice, that he was under compulsion and thereafter he submitted to that compulsion.’

Lord Parker CJ, Blain, Donaldson JJ
[1969] 2 QB 216
England and Wales

Torts – Other, Police

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.416725

The claimant, a teacher, said he had been unlawfully arrested and detained after an allegation of assault from a pupil. Having attended the police station voluntarily, he said that the circumstances did not satisfy the required precondition that an arrest was necessary. He said that the fact of the arrest would operate against him in his employment.
Held: The arrest was unlawful. ‘The missing element in the trilogy of prerequisites of a lawful arrest is c); that the arresting officer had reasonable grounds for believing that in order to interview the Claimant it was necessary to arrest him. There is simply no evidence as to whether and if so why PC Downie considered it necessary to arrest the Claimant.’
The duties of a custody officer are different from those of the arresting officer, and if his later arrest was lawful, that did not cure the original arrest if unlawful. The claimant had been co-operative and attended two police stations, and the officers had given no evidence to satisfy the court that they had applied the correct criteria, or if the had how it had been met.
The request for an order for destruction of DNA samples and fingerprints was refused, the defendant saying he would properly take the court’s decision into account when considering an application in that behalf.

Slade J
[2011] EWHC 773 (QB), [2011] 2 Cr App Rep 1
Bailii
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 2494), Police Act 1997 113B
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Holgate-Mohammed v Duke HL 1984
A police officer had purported to arrest the plaintiff under the 1967 Act, suspecting her of theft. After interview she was released several hours later without charge. She sought damages alleging wrongful arrest. The judge had found that he had . .
Cited – Alexander, Farrelly and Others, Re Judicial Review QBNI 5-Mar-2009
Each claimant said that they had been wrongfully arrested, the arresting police officers having either failed to ask whether the arrest was necessary (Farrelly), or mistakenly concluding so.
Held: The Order now contained in regulation . .
Cited – C, Regina (on the Application of) v ‘A’ Magistrates’ Court Admn 26-Sep-2006
Complaint was made about the slipshod completion of applications for search warrants. The nature of the review of compliance with Section 24(4) was to be that appropriate to Section 24(6). Underhill J held: ’26. The terms of s-s. (5) are new and . .
Cited – Castorina v Chief Constable of Surrey CA 10-Jun-1988
Whether an officer had reasonable cause to arrest somebody without a warrant depended upon an objective assessment of the information available to him, and not upon his subjective beliefs. The court had three questions to ask (per Woolf LJ): ‘(a) . .
Cited – Lewis and Evans v The Chief Constable of the South Wales Constabulary CA 11-Oct-1990
The plaintiffs said that their arrests had been unlawful.
Held: The arrests were lawful because, whilst their initial arrests were unlawful because the appellants were not told the reasons for them, they became lawful when they were given the . .
Cited – Al-Fayed and others v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and others CA 25-Nov-2004
The appellants appealed from dismissal of their claims for wrongful imprisonment by the respondent. Each had attended at a police station for interview on allegations of theft. They had been arrested and held pending interview and then released. Mr . .
Cited – Cumming and others v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police CA 17-Dec-2003
The six claimants sought damages for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment. Each had been arrested on an officer’s suspicion. They operated CCTV equipment, and it appeared that tapes showing the commission of an offence had been tampered with. Each . .
Cited – Plange v Chief Constable for Humberside Police CA 23-Mar-1992
Where an arresting officer knows at the time of arrest that no charge is possible, the arresting officer acts unlawfully. However, it is for the claimant to establish on Wednesbury principles that the decision to arrest in any particular case was . .
Cited – Thompson v Commissioner of Police of Metropolis; Hsu v Same CA 20-Feb-1997
CS Damages of 200,000 pounds by way of exemplary damages had been awarded against the police for unlawful arrest and assault.
Held: The court gave a guideline maximum pounds 50,000 award against police for . .
Cited – Wilding v Chief Constable of Lancashire CA 22-May-1995
The court considered a claim by a woman for wrongful arrest and unlawful detention by police officers who had reasonably suspected her of burglary of the house of her former partner. In interview by the police, she denied the offence and made . .

Cited by:
Distinguished – Hayes v Merseyside Police CA 29-Jul-2011
The claimant had been arrested after a complaint of harassment. The officer then contacted the complainant who then withdrew his complaint. The officer went to visit the complainant to discuss it further. On his return the claimant was released from . .
Cited – Lord Hanningfield of Chelmsford v Chief Constable of Essex Police QBD 15-Feb-2013
The claimant sought damages alleging unlawful arrest and search and detention. He had served a term of imprisonment for having made false expenses claims to the House of Lords. This raid occurred on his release. The arrest was planned and made to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Police

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.431296