Tag: Police

Wyman, Regina (on the Application of) v The Chief Constable of Hampshire Constaulary: Admn 24 Jul 2006

The claimant challenged a formal caution administered against him for an alleged sexual assault. He denied that he had made any clear admission of the offence.
Held: The requirement under the procedure was for a clear admission of guilt, but that admission could be taken from answers given in interview. Even so, here, there was no sufficient admission. The caution was quashed.

Silber J
[2006] EWHC 1904 (Admin)
Bailii
Sexual Offences Act 2003 3 76 78
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Commissioner of Metropolitan Police ex parte Thompson Admn 18-Dec-1996
When considering an application for judicial review, where a defendant had been cautioned by the police, it was necessary to recognise that the caution procedure did have legal consequences. Though ‘There is no statutory basis for the formal . .
Cited – Regina v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, Ex parte P QBD 1995
A court may set aside a police caution where the defendant had not made a clear admission of guilt. Simon Brown LJ: ‘It follows, in my judgment, that there was here no clear and reliable admission of guilt at any stage. I am invited to look at the . .
Cited – R, Regina (on the Application of) v Durham Constabulary and Another HL 17-Mar-2005
The appellant, a boy aged 15, had been warned as to admitted indecent assaults on girls. He complained that it had not been explained to him that the result would be that his name would be placed on the sex offenders register. The Chief Constable . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Police

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.243385

Swales v Cox: CA 1981

Police officers had entered a house in pursuit of a suspected burglar.
Held: It is a condition of any lawful breaking of premises that the person seeking entry has demanded and been refused entry by the occupier.
Donaldson LJ said: ‘it is conceded in this case that (the trial judge) correctly analysed the position at common law . . as follows:
that there was power of entry into premises at common law and, if necessary, power to break doors to do so in four cases, but in four cases only; that is to say by a constable or a citizen in order to prevent murder; by a constable or a citizen if a felony had in fact been committed and the felon had been followed to a house; by a constable or a citizen
if a felony was about to be committed, and would be committed, unless prevented; and by a constable following an offender running away from an affray. In any other circumstances there was no power to enter premises without a warrant, and, even in the four cases where there was power not only to enter but to break in order to do so, it was an essential pre-condition that there should have been a demand and refusal by the occupier to allow entry before the doors could be broken.’

Donaldson LJ
[1981] QB 849, [1981] 1 All ER 1115, [1981] 2 WLR 814
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Jones (Margaret), Regina v Milling and others HL 29-Mar-2006
Domestic Offence requires Domestic Defence
Each defendant sought to raise by way of defence of their otherwise criminal actions, the fact that they were attempting to prevent the commission by the government of the crime of waging an aggressive war in Iraq, and that their acts were . .
Cited – Lunt v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 1993
The defendant had been in a road traffic accident. The police came to his house to investigate the accident, but he refused to unlock the door to allow them entry. Stating reliance on section 4 of the 1988 Act, the officers threatened to force . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Land, Torts – Other

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.239968

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 was a police officer.
Held: The issue was not whether the defendant had believed that the officer was a constable. Lord Diplock said: ‘every citizen in whose presence a breach of the peace is being, or reasonably appears to be about to be, committed has the right to take reasonable steps to make the person who is breaking or threatening to break the peace refrain from doing so; and those reasonable steps in appropriate cases will include detaining him against his will. At common law this is not only the right of every citizen, it is also his duty, although, except in the case of a citizen who is a constable, it is a duty of imperfect obligation.’
Lord Diplock ‘. . . every citizen in whose presence a breach of the peace is being, or reasonably appears to be about to be, committed has the right to take reasonable steps to make the person who is breaking or threatening to break the peace refrain from doing so; and those reasonable steps in appropriate cases will include detaining him against his will. At common law this is not only the right of every citizen, it is also his duty, although, except in the case of a citizen who is a constable, it is a duty of imperfect obligation.’

Lord Diplock, Lord Simon of Glaisdale, Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Scarman, Lord Roskill
[1982] AC 546, [1981] 3 WLR 955, [1981] 3 All ER 878, [1981] UKHL 6
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Albert v Lavin QBD 1980
The defendant (A) and the prosecutor (L), an off duty constable not in uniform, awaited a bus. A pushed past the queue, whose members objected. L stood in his way. A pushed past onto the step of the bus, turned, grabbed L’s lapel and made to hit . .

Cited by:
Cited – Chief Constable of Cleveland Police v Mark Anthony McGrogan CA 12-Feb-2002
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 . .
Cited – Laporte, Regina (on the Application of) v Gloucestershire Constabulary and others Admn 19-Feb-2004
The court considered a claim for judicial review of a police officer’s decision to turn back a number of coaches. Each coach contained passengers en route to join a demonstration at an RAF base in Gloucestershire, the officer honestly and reasonably . .
Cited – Laporte, Regina (on the Application of) v Gloucestershire Constabulary and others CA 8-Dec-2004
The claimant had been in a bus taking her and others to an intended demonstration. The police feared breaches of the peace, and stopped the bus, and ordered the driver to return to London, and escorted it to ensure it did not stop.
Held: The . .
Cited – Austin and Saxby v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis QBD 23-Mar-2005
Towards the end of a substantial May Day demonstration on the streets of London, police surrounded about 3,000 people in Oxford Circus and did not allow them to leave for seven hours. The claimant who was present, but not involved in any of the . .
Cited – Ashley and Another v Sussex Police CA 27-Jul-2006
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 . .
Cited – Foulkes v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police CA 9-Jun-1998
A man was locked out of the matrimonial home which he owned jointly with his wife, following a family dispute. The police told him, as was the fact, that his wife and children did not want him to re-enter the house and the police suggested that he . .
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 – Williamson v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police CA 21-Feb-2003
The claimant had been arrested by an officer entering his house to investigate a breach of the peace, then held for two nights. The police believed that he posed no continuing threat, but believed he had to be brought before the magistrates before . .
Cited – Minto v Police 1987
When considering a police officer’s assessment that a breach of the peace is imminent, the question of immediacy is in part a question of degree and is highly relevant to the reasonableness of the action taken.
A refusal or failure to . .
Cited – Blench v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 5-Nov-2004
The defendant appealed against his conviction for assaulting a police officer in the execution of his duty under section 89. He had argued that he had no case to answer. The officers had received an emergency call to the house, but the female caller . .
Cited – Hicks and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis SC 15-Feb-2017
The claimants had wanted to make a peaceful anti-monarchist demonstration during the wedding of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. They complained that the actions of the respondent police infringed their human rights by preventing that . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Torts – Other, Police

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.180535

Stratton, Regina (on The Application of) v Thames Valley Police: Admn 7 Jun 2013

The claimant requested the court to set aside a caution accepted by her, when she said that she had not understood the serious consequences and had not admitted the offence.
Held: It was for each Chief Constable to draft his own policy, but taking proper account of Hoe Office and other guidance. Nevertheless, the paperwork was deficient in failing to explain the consequences of accepting the caution. This was particularly so where the suspect worked in an occupatione where she would require a clear CRB check to work. The caution was quashed.

Sir John Thomas P, Cranston J
[2013] EWHC 1561 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Chief Constable of Kent ex parte L 1991
The discretion which is vested in the Crown Prosecution Service to continue criminal proceedings commenced by the police is subject to judicial review by the High Court, but only where it can be shown that the decision was made regardless of, or . .
Cited – Regina v Commissioner of Metropolitan Police ex parte Thompson Admn 18-Dec-1996
When considering an application for judicial review, where a defendant had been cautioned by the police, it was necessary to recognise that the caution procedure did have legal consequences. Though ‘There is no statutory basis for the formal . .
Cited – Regina v Chief Constable of North Wales Police and Others Ex Parte Thorpe and Another; Regina v Chief Constable for North Wales Police Area and others ex parte AB and CB CA 18-Mar-1998
Public Identification of Pedophiles by Police
AB and CB had been released from prison after serving sentences for sexual assaults on children. They were thought still to be dangerous. They moved about the country to escape identification, and came to be staying on a campsite. The police sought . .
Cited – R, Regina (on the Application of) v Durham Constabulary and Another HL 17-Mar-2005
The appellant, a boy aged 15, had been warned as to admitted indecent assaults on girls. He complained that it had not been explained to him that the result would be that his name would be placed on the sex offenders register. The Chief Constable . .
Cited – Caetano v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis Admn 28-Feb-2013
The claimant now challenged the giving of a simple caution for an alleged assault on her partner.
Held: The evidential basis of the offer of the caution was unsatisfactory, but she had accepted it on legal advice. The case involved allegations . .
Cited – Blackburn v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis CA 1968
By common law police officers owe to the general public a duty to enforce the criminal law. However, police are servants of no one but the law itself, and a chief officer of police has a wide discretion as to the manner in which the duty is . .
Cited – L, Regina (On the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis SC 29-Oct-2009
Rebalancing of Enhanced Disclosure Requirements
The Court was asked as to the practice of supplying enhanced criminal record certificates under the 1997 Act. It was said that the release of reports of suspicions was a disproportionate interference in the claimants article 8 rights to a private . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Police

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.510199

Bedfordshire Police Authority v Constable and others: ComC 20 Jun 2008

The authority insured its primary liability for compensation under the 1886 Act through the claimants and the excess of liability through re-insurers. The parties sought clarification from the court of the respective liabilities of the insurance companies and as to whether the compensation under the Acts counted as damages under the policies. The syndicate said that damages are quintessentially sums which fall to be paid by reason of some breach of duty or obligation.
Held: The question for consideration is what the document would convey to a reasonable person having all the background knowledge which would have reasonably been available to the parties at the time of the contract. There was no clear evidence that the parties had considered the detailed provisions carefully, but was rather a collection of standard clauses. There was no reason to think that the purpose of the Underlying Policy was anything other than the protection of the police fund against claims by third parties for personal injury or damage to property. The claimant was entitled to be indemnified by the defendant pursuant to the Excess Policy in respect of any liability of the claimant to pay compensation under the 1886 Act.

Walker J
[2008] EWHC 1375 (Comm), [2009] Lloyd’s Rep IR 39, [2009] 2 All ER (Comm) 200
Bailii
Police Act 1996, Riot (Damages) Act 1886
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Re Hooley Hill Rubber and Royal Insurance Co CA 1920
When interprting a contract, it is assumed that the draftsman works with a view to certainty of sense and standardisation of terms. Bankes LJ said: ‘Courts should be chary in interfering with the interpretation given to a well-known document and . .
Cited – Toomey v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd CA 1994
The word ‘reinsurance’ is often used loosely simply to describe any contract of insurance which is placed by or for the benefit of an insurer, but it should be construed more properly to require the insurance of an insurable interest in the subject . .
Cited – Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society HL 19-Jun-1997
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity
The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside.
Held: Investors having once . .
Cited – Sunport Shipping Limited, Prometheus Maritime Corporation, Celestial Maritime Corporation, Surzur Overseas Limited v Tryg-Baltica International (UK) Ltd (Formerly Know As Colonia Baltica Insurance Ltd) and others CA 24-Jan-2003
(The ‘Kleovoulos of Rhodes’) A large quantity of cocaine was discovered by divers behind a grille in a sea chest at the vessel’s discharge port, Aliveri – having been placed there by unknown third persons at the load port in Colombia, South America. . .
Cited – Yorkshire Water Services Ltd v Sun Alliance and London Insurance Plc and Others (1) CA 20-Aug-1996
The court was asked whether the costs of flood alleviation works were recoverable under public liability insurance policies.
Held: A claim for the costs of remedial action taken to mitigate future losses were not covered by the terms of the . .
Cited – F and K Jabbour v Custodian of Israeli Absentee Property 1953
The court was asked as to the effect of foreign regulations on the ownership of a right of action under an insurance policy, and for that purpose examined whether the plaintiff’s claim against the insurance company was a ‘mere right to claim . .
Cited – Hall Brothers Steamship Company Limited v Young CA 1939
The shipowners appealed a decision that the underwriters were not liable under collision liability clause. Their ship had collided with another at Dunkirk when the steering gear failed. Under french law the pilot was not liable since he had not been . .
Cited – Tesco Stores Ltd v Constable and others CA 16-Apr-2008
Tesco voluntarily agreed to indemnify a third party for economic loss. When that third party claimed under the indemnity for economic losses arising out of damage to property of another, Tesco sought to claim under its own public liability insurance . .
Cited – Tioxide Europe Ltd v CGU International Plc and others CA 20-Jul-2005
The court considered how an insurance contract should be construed. Langley J said: ‘The general principle is that the proper construction is to be determined by the ordinary and natural meaning of the words used in the contractual and commercial . .
Cited – Charterhouse Development (France) Limited v Sharp ChD 1998
French courts had held the claimant liable to remedy the deficiency of an insolvent company’s assets under a French law. The insured now sought repayment by its insurers, who denied that this was a payment of damages.
Held: The payment was . .
Cited – Lancashire County Council v Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd CA 3-Apr-1996
The defendant agreed to indemnify the insured ‘in respect of all sums which the insured shall become legally liable to pay as compensation arising out of’ various matters including wrongful arrest, malicious prosecution and false imprisonment. The . .
Mentioned – Rylands v Fletcher HL 1868
The defendant had constructed a reservoir to supply water to his mill. Water escaped into nearby disused mineshafts, and in turn flooded the plaintiff’s mine. The defendant appealed a finding that he was liable in damages.
Held: The defendant . .
Cited – Charter Reinsurance Co Ltd v Fagan and Others HL 24-May-1996
The re-insurers appealed against a finding that they were liable to make payment under a contract which required them to pay ‘sums actually paid.’ They said that the company having become insolvent, no payment would in fact be made.
Held: The . .
Cited – J W Dwyer Ltd v Metropolitan Police District Receiver 1967
The owner of a jewellery shop claimed to recover compensation from the police for damage to his shop in a smash and grab raid. Since there were more than 3 robbers, the police accepted that there had been a riot but defended the claim on the basis . .
Cited – DH Edmonds Ltd v East Sussex Police Authority CA 6-Jul-1988
The plaintiffs Brighton jewellers sought compensation from the police authority for a raid on their premises by three or four men. Kenneth Jones J at first instance held that the incident did not involve a tumultuous assembly and accordingly the . .
Cited – Ford v Receiver for the Metropolitan Police District 1921
Bailhache J considered a claim under the 1886 Act: ‘There must be judgment for the plaintiff, and the question of the quantum of damages must be referred.’ . .
Cited – Kaufmann Brothers v Liverpool Corporation KBD 1916
It was argued that a claim under the 1886 Act was a claim for ‘alleged neglect or default’ within the meaning of the 1893 Act, so that the claim was time-barred under that Act.
Held: The argument failed. The 1893 Act did not apply.
Lush J . .
Cited – Pitchers v Surrey County Council 1923
In 1919 there was a riot involving Canadian soldiers from a local Camp. They released fellow soldiers in custody and raided the officers’ mess, and damaged and stole the contents of a tailor’s shop and other shops known as ‘Tin Town’ – a group of . .
Cited – Bearmans Ltd v Metropolitan Police District Receiver CA 1961
Sellers LJ said: ‘The second plaintiffs had paid some andpound;5,000 for that theft; and for their respective losses these plaintiffs sought to recover damages under the Riot (Damages) Act, 1886’
The court considered that a liberal approach . .
Cited – Bartoline Limited v Royal Sun Alliance plc 2007
The claimant sought an indemnity under the Public Liability Section of a Combined Policy for: (i) expense incurred by the Environment Agency under section 161 of the Water Resources Act 1991 cleaning up water courses of pollutants after a fire on . .
Cited – Scott (for and Behalf of All Underwriting Members of Syndicates 401 and 857 at Lloyd’s) v The Copenhagen Reinsurance Company (UK) Ltd CA 16-May-2003
Where an insurance policy required damage to have been caused by an insured risk, the causative link had to be a significant rather than a weak one.
Determining whether transactions are related is therefore an acutely fact sensitive exercise, . .

Cited by:
See Also – Yarl’s Wood Immigration Ltd and others v Bedfordshire Police Authority ComC 30-Sep-2008
The owners of the Yarslwood Immigration centre sought damages under the 1886 Act after a riot at the centre caused substantial damage.
Held: The claim failed: ‘The fact that YWIL and GSL [the appellants] were acting as public authorities . .
Appeal from – Bedfordshire Police Authority v Constable CA 12-Feb-2009
The police had responded to a riot at Yarlswood detention centre. They had insurance to cover their liability under the 1886 Act, but the re-insurers said that the insurance did not cover the event, saying that the liability was for statutory . .
See Also – Yarl’s Wood Immigration Ltd and Others v Bedfordshire Police Authority CA 23-Oct-2009
The claimant sought to recover the costs of damage to their centre following a riot, saying that under the 1886 Act, they were liable. It appealed against a ruling that they were unable to claim as a public authority, saying that the 1886 Act was . .
Cited – The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime v Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance Co (Europe) Ltd and Others SC 20-Apr-2016
The Court considered the quantification of damages to be awarded to a business suffering under riots under the 1886 Act, and in particular whether such recoverable losses included compensation for consequential losses, including loss of profits and . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Insurance

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.270220

Mouncher and Others v South Wales Police: QBD 14 Jun 2016

The claimants were police and former police officers who alledged mistreatment by other officers investigating them both during the investigation (LW3) and during their subsequent criminal trials.
Held: All the claims for misfeasance in public office failed. After detailed consideration some claims succeeded and some failed. On the whole there was no evidence of the officers having either deliberately or recklessly exceeded his/her powers during the course of discharging his/her duty during the course of LW3.

Wyn Williams J
[2016] EWHC 1367 (QB)
Bailii, Judicary Summary, Judiciary
England and Wales

Torts – Other, Police

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.565543

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 reasons at the time of their presentation to the custody officer.

Balcombe, Taylor LJJ
[1990] EWCA Civ 5, [1991] 1 All ER 206
Bailii
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 28
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Richardson v The Chief Constable of West Midlands Police QBD 29-Mar-2011
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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.248040

Bedfordshire Police Authority v Constable: CA 12 Feb 2009

The police had responded to a riot at Yarlswood detention centre. They had insurance to cover their liability under the 1886 Act, but the re-insurers said that the insurance did not cover the event, saying that the liability was for statutory compensation and not in damages as covered by the insurance policy.
Held: The insured’s appeal failed. Once one appreciates that the reason for the 1886 Act placing the burden of paying compensation to the victims of riot damage on the police authority is that the police are responsible for law and order and that they are (notionally) in breach of that responsibility, it seems to me, as an English lawyer, that compensation payable is a sum which the police authority is ‘liable to pay as damages’.

[2009] EWCA Civ 64
Bailii
Riot (Damages) Act 1886 2
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – J W Dwyer Ltd v Metropolitan Police District Receiver 1967
The owner of a jewellery shop claimed to recover compensation from the police for damage to his shop in a smash and grab raid. Since there were more than 3 robbers, the police accepted that there had been a riot but defended the claim on the basis . .
Cited – DH Edmonds Ltd v East Sussex Police Authority CA 6-Jul-1988
The plaintiffs Brighton jewellers sought compensation from the police authority for a raid on their premises by three or four men. Kenneth Jones J at first instance held that the incident did not involve a tumultuous assembly and accordingly the . .
Cited – Hall Brothers Steamship Company Limited v Young 1938
The insured vessel, Trident, went to Dunkirk and engaged a French pilot whose pilot boat developed a fault in its steering gear which caused her to collide with Trident without Trident being in any way to blame. French law had a provision that . .
Cited – Hall Brothers Steamship Company Limited v Young CA 1939
The shipowners appealed a decision that the underwriters were not liable under collision liability clause. Their ship had collided with another at Dunkirk when the steering gear failed. Under french law the pilot was not liable since he had not been . .
Cited – Sunport Shipping Limited, Prometheus Maritime Corporation, Celestial Maritime Corporation, Surzur Overseas Limited v Tryg-Baltica International (UK) Ltd (Formerly Know As Colonia Baltica Insurance Ltd) and others CA 24-Jan-2003
(The ‘Kleovoulos of Rhodes’) A large quantity of cocaine was discovered by divers behind a grille in a sea chest at the vessel’s discharge port, Aliveri – having been placed there by unknown third persons at the load port in Colombia, South America. . .
Cited – Charterhouse Development (France) Limited v Sharp ChD 1998
French courts had held the claimant liable to remedy the deficiency of an insolvent company’s assets under a French law. The insured now sought repayment by its insurers, who denied that this was a payment of damages.
Held: The payment was . .
Cited – Yorkshire Water Services Ltd v Sun Alliance and London Insurance Plc and Others (1) CA 20-Aug-1996
The court was asked whether the costs of flood alleviation works were recoverable under public liability insurance policies.
Held: A claim for the costs of remedial action taken to mitigate future losses were not covered by the terms of the . .
Cited – Bartoline Limited v Royal Sun Alliance plc 2007
The claimant sought an indemnity under the Public Liability Section of a Combined Policy for: (i) expense incurred by the Environment Agency under section 161 of the Water Resources Act 1991 cleaning up water courses of pollutants after a fire on . .
Appeal from – Bedfordshire Police Authority v Constable and others ComC 20-Jun-2008
The authority insured its primary liability for compensation under the 1886 Act through the claimants and the excess of liability through re-insurers. The parties sought clarification from the court of the respective liabilities of the insurance . .
See Also – Yarl’s Wood Immigration Ltd and others v Bedfordshire Police Authority ComC 30-Sep-2008
The owners of the Yarslwood Immigration centre sought damages under the 1886 Act after a riot at the centre caused substantial damage.
Held: The claim failed: ‘The fact that YWIL and GSL [the appellants] were acting as public authorities . .

Cited by:
See Also – Yarl’s Wood Immigration Ltd and Others v Bedfordshire Police Authority CA 23-Oct-2009
The claimant sought to recover the costs of damage to their centre following a riot, saying that under the 1886 Act, they were liable. It appealed against a ruling that they were unable to claim as a public authority, saying that the 1886 Act was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Insurance

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.282613

Wood v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis: Admn 22 May 2008

The claimant challenged the right of police officers to take his photograph as he attended an annual general meeting of Reed Elsevier Plc. He was a campaigner against the arms trade, but had always acted lawfully. The company noted the purchase of single shares by membersof the group and alerted the police. The defendant decided to deploy officers at the meeting. An associate was ejected from the meeting. They were photographed after and outside the meeting. The claimant said that he felt intimidated by the action. The court compared the actions with those of the Staasi, saying that it was at a lower level, but that ‘it is the development of such state activity against which one has to vigilant.’ However the taking of photographs in the street was not an infringement of his human rights and was not unlawful.

McCombe J
[2008] EWHC 1105 (Admin), Times 13-Jun-2008
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 8
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Murray v Big Pictures (UK) Ltd; Murray v Express Newspapers CA 7-May-2008
The claimant, a famous writer, complained on behalf of her infant son that he had been photographed in a public street with her, and that the photograph had later been published in a national newspaper. She appealed an order striking out her claim . .
Cited – X v United Kingdom ECHR 1972
The defendant had been convicted of knowingly living on the earnings of prostitution contrary to section 30(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 1956.
Held: The Commission rejected as manifestly ill-founded the applicant’s challenge to this provision . .
Cited – PG and JH v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Sep-2001
The use of covert listening devices within a police station was an infringement of the right to privacy, since there was no system of law regulating such practices. That need not affect the right to a fair trial. The prosecution had a duty to . .
Cited – Ash and Another v McKennitt and others CA 14-Dec-2006
The claimant was a celebrated Canadian folk musician. The defendant, a former friend, published a story of their close friendship. The claimant said the relationship had been private, and publication infringed her privacy rights, and she obtained an . .
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 – Friedl v Austria ECHR 31-Jan-1995
The Commission distinguished between the taking and keeping of photographs without identifying the subjects, and police questioning in order to establish identity and the recording of these personal data; the former was not an interference with . .
Cited – Von Hannover v Germany ECHR 24-Jun-2004
Princess Caroline of Monaco who had, at some time, received considerable attention in the media throughout Europe, complained at the publication of photographs taken of her withour her permission.
Held: There was no doubt that the publication . .
Cited – Perry v The United Kingdom ECHR 17-Jul-2003
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8 ; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award
The claimant had been arrested, then released to attend an identification parade. Several attempts . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Information, Police, Human Rights

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.267981

Faisaltex Ltd and Others v Lancashire Constabulary and Another: QBD 24 Jul 2009

The claimants wished to claim damages saying that in executing a search warrant, the defendant had made excessive seizures of material. The claimants sought inspection by independent counsel of the materials seized to establish this in a manner similar to the protocol which protected seizures of material which might be protected by legal professional privilege, and an order for them to be returned.
Held: Where police intended to seize a wide range of materials, they had a duty to notify the occupier that he is exercising this power. Without such a notice the Bramley principles applied. However the balance of convenience lay with allowing the investigation to continue, and damages if properly payable would be an adequate remedy in due course. An injunction should not be granted.

Eady J
[2009] EWHC 1884 (QB)
Bailii
Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 59
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Chief Constable for Warwickshire and Others Ex Parte Fitzpatrick and Others QBD 1-Oct-1997
Judicial Review is not the appropriate way to challenge the excessive nature of a search warrant issues by magistrates. A private law remedy is better. Jowitt J said: ‘Judicial review is not a fact finding exercise and it is an extremely . .
See Also – Faisaltex Ltd and others, Regina (on the Application of) v Crown Court Sitting at Preston and others etc Admn 21-Nov-2008
Nine claimants sought leave to bring judicial review of the issue of search warrants against solicitors’ and business and other premises, complaining of the seizure of excluded material and of special procedure material. There were suspicions of the . .
Cited – Regina v Chesterfield Justices and Others, Ex Parte Bramley QBD 10-Nov-1999
When police officers executed a search warrant, it was not proper to remove articles at large, in order later to sift through them, and then to return material not covered by the warrant. There is no absolute prohibition against removing articles . .
Cited – American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd HL 5-Feb-1975
Interim Injunctions in Patents Cases
The plaintiffs brought proceedings for infringement of their patent. The proceedings were defended. The plaintiffs obtained an interim injunction to prevent the defendants infringing their patent, but they now appealed its discharge by the Court of . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame (No 2) HL 11-Oct-1990
The validity of certain United Kingdom legislation was challenged on the basis that it contravened provisions of the EEC Treaty by depriving the applicants of their Community rights to fish in European waters, and an interlocutory injunction was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.361475

Regina v Argent: CACD 16 Dec 1996

The defendant complained that, after acting on his solicitor’s advice to not answer questions when interviewed by the police, the court had allowed the jury to draw inferences from his failure. The police had failed to make such full disclosure of the case against the appellant as they could and should have done. The solicitor’s advice not to answer questions in such circumstances was in accordance with Law Society guidance.
Held: The questions of whether the accused has relied on a fact in his defence and if he has whether he failed to mention it in interview are questions of fact for the jury. The jury is concerned not with the correctness of a solicitor’s advice, but with the reasonableness of the defendant’s conduct in all the circumstances including the advice given.
Lord Bingham CJ said: ‘Subsection (2)(d) empowers a jury in prescribed circumstances to draw such inferences as appear proper. The words which we have emphasised embody a recognition of the fact that section 34 is a section which provides for an exception to the common law rule: and it is of course the case that the 1994 Act does not abolish the entitlement of a suspect to remain silent but only and in a limited way derogates from the common law rule that no adverse inference should be drawn against him when he has, after caution, exercised that right. It is not without significance that the new standard caution includes the words: ‘But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court’. Where s. 34 does apply, the jury have to be told to consider whether the accused – not a reasonable man but the man being tried, with all the ‘qualities, apprehensions, knowledge and advice . . he is shown to have had at the time’.
Lord Bingham CJ set out the six conditions to be met: ‘What then are the formal conditions to be met before the jury may draw such an inference? In our judgment there are six such conditions. The first is that there must be proceedings against a person for an offence; that condition must necessarily be satisfied before section 34(2)(d) can bite . . The second condition is that the alleged failure must occur before a defendant is charged . . The third condition is that the alleged failure must occur during questioning under caution by a constable . . The fourth condition is that the constable’s questioning must be directed to trying to discover whether or by whom the alleged offence had been committed . . The fifth condition is that the alleged failure by the defendant must be to mention any fact relied on in his defence in those proceedings. That raises two questions of fact: first, is there some fact which the defendant has relied on in his defence; and second, did the defendant fail to mention it to the constable when he was being questioned in accordance with the section? Being questions of fact these questions are for the jury as the tribunal of fact to resolve . . The sixth condition is that the appellant failed to mention a fact which in the circumstances existing at the time the accused could reasonably have been expected to mention when so questioned. The time referred to is the time of questioning, and account must be taken of all the relevant circumstances existing at that time. The courts should not construe the expression ‘in the circumstances’ restrictively: matters such as time of day, the defendant’s age, experience, mental capacity, state of health, sobriety, tiredness, knowledge, personality and legal advice are all part of the relevant circumstances; and those are only examples of things which may be relevant. When reference is made to ‘the accused’ attention is directed not to some hypothetical, reasonable accused of ordinary phlegm and fortitude but to the actual accused with such qualities, apprehensions, knowledge and advice as he is shown to have had at the time.’

Lord Bingham LCJ
[1996] EWCA Crim 1728, [1997] 2 Cr App R 27, Times 19-Dec-1996, [1997] Crim LR 449
Bailii
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34(2)(d), Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Gill CACD 21-Jul-2000
When a defendant was silent, it was necessary for the court to be especially careful to give precise and accurate directions on the effect of such silence as to the drawing of adverse inferences. Having answered questions on some aspects, it was not . .
Cited – Regina v McGarry CACD 16-Jul-1998
Where the judge decided that no inference could be drawn from the defendant’s silence, because of the absence of facts which could have been mentioned, he had a duty positively to warn the jury not arbitrarily to draw adverse inferences from the . .
Cited – Regina v Webber HL 22-Jan-2004
The defendant complained that the judge had given a direction under s34 even though his counsel had only put matters to witnesses for the prosecution.
Held: A positive suggestion put to a witness by or on behalf of a defendant may amount to a . .
Cited – Petkar and Farquar, Regina v CACD 16-Oct-2003
The defendants appealed their convictions and sentence for theft. Whilst employed by a bank thay had arranged for transfers to their own account. Each blamed the other. They appealed on the basis that the direction on their silence at interview was . .
Cited – T v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 10-Jul-2007
Appeal by case stated against conviction of having secured entry to premises by violence. Inferences to be drawn from defendant’s silence at police interview. The defendant complained that the magstrates should have set out clearly what inferences . .
Cited – Fitzgerald, Regina v CACD 6-Mar-1998
The defendant appealed against his conviction for robbery. At interview, his solicitor had explained his failure to answer questions by reference to the involvement of others, but in terms which treated this itself as an admission.
Held: The . .
Cited – Regina v Roble CACD 21-Jan-1997
The defendant appealed against his conviction for wounding with intent. He had answered ‘no comment’ in the police interview, but claimed self defence at trial. The court considered what note should be taken of the solicitor’s evidence of his advice . .
Cited – Black v Regina CACD 17-Jul-2020
Disclosure Sufficient to Support Inference
The court was asked whether sufficient evidence had been adduced about the strength of the prosecution case at the time of interview, to permit an adverse inference to be drawn from the failure to mention specific facts pursuant to section 34 of the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Police

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.149392

Yarl’s Wood Immigration Ltd and Others v Bedfordshire Police Authority: CA 23 Oct 2009

The claimant sought to recover the costs of damage to their centre following a riot, saying that under the 1886 Act, they were liable. It appealed against a ruling that they were unable to claim as a public authority, saying that the 1886 Act was not limited in the way suggested.
Held: Though privately operated, the claimants were satisfying a statutory duty. The appeal succeeded, and the claimants could continue with their claims. The law operated within the Centre as much as outside it. The Act imposed strict liability: ‘as is so often the case with strict liability, it is because those who are liable to compensate are also regarded by the law as standing in the shoes of the wrongdoers themselves (as, for instance, in the case of the vicariously liable), in part because their obligation, their strict obligation, is to prevent what has happened happening.’

Rix, Wall, Aikens LJJ
[2009] EWCA Civ 1110, [2010] 2 WLR 1322, [2010] 2 All ER 221
Bailii
Riot (Damages) Act 1886
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Yarl’s Wood Immigration Ltd and others v Bedfordshire Police Authority ComC 30-Sep-2008
The owners of the Yarslwood Immigration centre sought damages under the 1886 Act after a riot at the centre caused substantial damage.
Held: The claim failed: ‘The fact that YWIL and GSL [the appellants] were acting as public authorities . .
See Also – Bedfordshire Police Authority v Constable and others ComC 20-Jun-2008
The authority insured its primary liability for compensation under the 1886 Act through the claimants and the excess of liability through re-insurers. The parties sought clarification from the court of the respective liabilities of the insurance . .
See Also – Bedfordshire Police Authority v Constable CA 12-Feb-2009
The police had responded to a riot at Yarlswood detention centre. They had insurance to cover their liability under the 1886 Act, but the re-insurers said that the insurance did not cover the event, saying that the liability was for statutory . .
Cited – YL v Birmingham City Council and Others HL 20-Jun-2007
The House was asked whether a private care home when providing accommodation and care to a resident under arrangements with a local authority the 1948 Act, is performing ‘functions of a public nature’ for the purposes of section 6(3)(b) of the Human . .
Cited – Glasbrook Brothers Limited v Glamorgan County Council HL 1925
A colliery manager asked for police protection for his colliery during a strike. He wanted police officers to be billeted on the premises. The senior police officer for the area was willing to provide protection by a mobile force, but he refused to . .
Cited – Radcliffe v Eden 1776
Police Liabie for Damage to Furniture in Riot
The owners of furniture destroyed by rioters who entered a house and damaged it recovered compensation, even though the 1714 Act did not expressly mention furniture.
Lord Mansfield said: ‘To encourage people to resist persons thus riotously . .
Cited – Mason v Sainsbury 19-Apr-1782
A claim was made upon insurance after a riot. The court asked asked ‘Who is first liable?’ This was not an issue of chronology but of establishing where the primary responsibility lay to make good the loss. The Act laid the primary responsibility . .
Cited – Glamorgan Coal Co v Glamorgan Joint Standing Committee 1915
Bankes LJ said that the duties of police forces include the preservation of the peace, the protection of the inhabitants, and the safeguarding of property within their area. . .
Cited – Kaufmann Brothers v Liverpool Corporation KBD 1916
It was argued that a claim under the 1886 Act was a claim for ‘alleged neglect or default’ within the meaning of the 1893 Act, so that the claim was time-barred under that Act.
Held: The argument failed. The 1893 Act did not apply.
Lush J . .
Cited – Pitchers v Surrey County Council 1923
In 1919 there was a riot involving Canadian soldiers from a local Camp. They released fellow soldiers in custody and raided the officers’ mess, and damaged and stole the contents of a tailor’s shop and other shops known as ‘Tin Town’ – a group of . .
Cited – Glasbrook Brothers Limited v Glamorgan County Council HL 1925
A colliery manager asked for police protection for his colliery during a strike. He wanted police officers to be billeted on the premises. The senior police officer for the area was willing to provide protection by a mobile force, but he refused to . .
Applied – Pitchers v Surrey County Council CA 2-Jan-1923
The claimant sought payment for damages to his property after imprisoned Canadian troops were released and came into the town causing damage.
Held: Lord Sterndale said: ‘it is said that this camp under the circumstances ceased to be within the . .
Cited – J W Dwyer Ltd v Metropolitan Police District Receiver 1967
The owner of a jewellery shop claimed to recover compensation from the police for damage to his shop in a smash and grab raid. Since there were more than 3 robbers, the police accepted that there had been a riot but defended the claim on the basis . .
Cited – River Wear Commissioners v Adamson HL 1877
It was not necessary for there to be an ambiguity in a statutory provision for a court to be allowed to look at the surrounding circumstances.
As to the Golden Rule of interpretation: ‘It is to be borne in mind that the office of the judge is . .
Cited – Parochial Church Council of the Parish of Aston Cantlow and Wilmcote with Billesley, Warwickshire v Wallbank and another HL 26-Jun-2003
Parish Councils are Hybrid Public Authorities
The owners of glebe land were called upon as lay rectors to contribute to the cost of repairs to the local church. They argued that the claim was unlawful by section 6 of the 1998 Act as an act by a public authority incompatible with a Convention . .
Cited – DH Edmonds Ltd v East Sussex Police Authority CA 6-Jul-1988
The plaintiffs Brighton jewellers sought compensation from the police authority for a raid on their premises by three or four men. Kenneth Jones J at first instance held that the incident did not involve a tumultuous assembly and accordingly the . .
Cited – Moses v Marsland 1901
A ‘public building’ is a building which the public is invited to enter or to which it can demand admission. . .
Cited – Stock v Frank Jones (Tipton) Ltd HL 1978
Where the words of a statute are clear, it is not open to the court to limit, change or disregard that meaning on the ground that the result of the legislation as drafted would be anomalous or absurd.
Lord Simon of Glaisdale said as to an . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Damages

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.377240

Akarcay, Regina (on The Application of) v West Yorkshire Police and Others: Admn 3 Feb 2017

‘The claimant seeks to challenge the provision of material by the West Yorkshire Police to their counterparts in the Turkish Republic of North Cyprus, where he now faces prosecution for drug related and money laundering offences alleged to have been committed in England. Northern Cyprus is not recognised by the United Kingdom, nor by any other country save Turkey.’
Burnett LJ, Thirlwall J
[2017] EWHC 159 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 26 October 2021; Ref: scu.573921

Yavuz, Regina (on The Application of) v West Yorkshire Police: Admn 10 Aug 2016

The claimant appealed against the rejection of adequacy and findings of an investigation into a complaint against police officers made by him. The complaint included the unlawful use of force, failure to follow correct arrest procedures and the fabrication of evidence.
Sweeney J
[2016] EWHC 2054 (Admin)
Bailii
Police Reform Act 2002
England and Wales

Updated: 26 October 2021; Ref: scu.568012

Desmond v The Chief Constable of Nottinghamshire Police: CA 12 Jan 2011

The claimant appealed from the rejection of his claim in negligence against the police. He had been arrested on suspicion of a sexual assault, but the investigating officer concluded that he was not responsible for the crime. Despite this, several years later the allegation was disclosed on an Enhanced Criminal Records Check, impeding his employment as a teacher.
Held: The appeal failed. Police immunity in negligence is not confined to cases of omission.
Leveson LJ President of the Queen’s Bench Division
[2011] EWCA Civ 3, [2011] 1 FLR 1361, [2011] Fam Law 358, [2011] PTSR 1369
Bailii
Police Act 1997 115
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal From – Desmond v The Chief Constable Of Nottinghamshhire Police QBD 1-Oct-2009
The claimant appealed against the striking out of parts of his claim alleging negligence and misfeasance. He had been arrested on suspicion of indecent assault, but then was fully cleared by a third officer. When he later applied for an enhanced CRB . .

Cited by:
Cited – Robinson v West Yorkshire Police CA 5-Feb-2014
The claimant was a bystander, injured during an arrest on the street by officers employed by the respondent. She now appealed against rejection of her claim in negligence. Held; No duty of care was owed, and that, even if the officers had owed Mrs . .
Cited – Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police SC 8-Feb-2018
Limits to Police Exemption from Liability
The claimant, an elderly lady was bowled over and injured when police were chasing a suspect through the streets. As they arrested him they fell over on top of her. She appealed against refusal of her claim in negligence.
Held: Her appeal . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 October 2021; Ref: scu.427981

AR, Regina (on The Application of) v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police and Another: SC 30 Jul 2018

The appellant had been tried for and acquitted on a criminal charge. He now challenged the disclosure by the respondent of the charge in an Enhanced Criminal Record Certificate.
Held: His appeal failed. The critical question was whether the disclosure made was a proportionate interference with the claimant’s rights. This was a matter for assessment by the judge hearing the evidence.
Lord Carnwath said: ‘To limit intervention to a ‘significant error of principle’ is too narrow an approach, at least if it is taken as implying that the appellate court has to point to a specific principle – whether of law, policy or practice – which has been infringed by the judgment of the court below. The decision may be wrong, not because of some specific error of principle in that narrow sense, but because of an identifiable flaw in the judge’s reasoning, such as a gap in logic, a lack of consistency, or a failure to take account of some material factor, which undermines the cogency of the conclusion. However, it is equally clear that, for the decision to be ‘wrong’ under CPR 52.11(3), it is not enough that the appellate court might have arrived at a different evaluation. ‘
Lord Kerr, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hughes, Lord Lloyd-Jones
[2018] UKSC 47, [2018] WLR(D) 533, [2018] 1 WLR 4079, [2019] 1 All ER 391, [2018] HRLR 17, 46 BHRC 111, (2018) 21 CCL Rep 637
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD
Police Act 1997 113B, European Convention on Human Rights 8, Human Rights Act 1998
England and Wales
Citing:
At Admn – AR, Regina (on The Application of) v The Greater Manchester Police and Another Admn 5-Sep-2013
The claimant sought judicial review of the enhanced criminal record issued by the respondents when he sought a licence as a private hire driver. He had been tried and acquitted on a charge of rape.
Held: The request for review failed.
Appeal from (CA) – AR, Regina (on The Application of) v Greater Manchester Police and Another CA 10-Jun-2016
The claimant complained that despite his acquittal after trial on a charge of rape, the accusation was revealed by the defendant on application for an enhanced criminal record certificate.
Held: The information contained in the certificate . .
Cited – Regina (X) v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police CA 30-Jul-2004
The claimant had been accused of offences, but the prosecution had been discontinued when the child victims had failed to identify him. The police had nevertheless notified potential employers and he had been unable to obtain work as a social . .
Cited – S, Regina (on the Application of) v West Mercia Constabulary and Another Admn 18-Nov-2008
The claimant complained of an enhanced disclosure of his record disclosing has arrest and trial on charges of outraging public decency. He said that he had been acquitted in terms which clearly said that the case was one of mistaken identity.
Cited – L, Regina (On the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis SC 29-Oct-2009
Rebalancing of Enhanced Disclosure Requirements
The Court was asked as to the practice of supplying enhanced criminal record certificates under the 1997 Act. It was said that the release of reports of suspicions was a disproportionate interference in the claimants article 8 rights to a private . .
Cited – LG v The Independent Monitor Admn 21-Dec-2017
The ECRC recorded the acquittal of a nurse on charges of theft from a patient, noting that her earlier admission of theft had been ruled inadmissible at trial, and the jury directed to acquit.
Held: The information had been properly included. . .
Cited – Regina (BW) v Independent Monitor Admn 2015
The ECRC had included the reasons given by a District Judge in the Youth Court for acquitting the applicant of a charge of common assault, including his view that ‘the burden of proof was not to the required standard and that the benefit of the . .
Cited – Adams, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 11-May-2011
The three claimants had each been convicted of murders and served time. Their convictions had been reversed eventually, and they now appealed against the refusal of compensation for imprisonment, saying that there had been a miscarriage of justice. . .
Cited – A, Regina (on The Application of) v Kent Constabulary CA 20-Dec-2013
The claimant had successfully challenged the terms of an enhanced Criminal Record certificate. The Chief Constable now appealed. . .
Cited – A, Regina (on The Application of) v The Chief Constable of Kent Constabulary Admn 8-Mar-2013
Claim under the Human Rights Act 1998, in respect of the Defendant’s decision to disclose allegations of neglect and ill-treatment of care home residents in an Enhanced Criminal Records Certificate; the ECRC recorded that the applicant was found not . .
Cited – RK, Regina (on The Application of) v South Yorkshire Police and Another Admn 10-Jun-2013
Dispute between the claimant and South Yorkshire Police (‘SYP’) in connection with the latter’s proposed disclosure to prospective employers of information relating to events allegedly involving the claimant that occurred almost ten years ago. . .
Cited – Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 21-Mar-2007
Appellate Roles – Human Rights – Families Split
The House considered the decision making role of immigration appellate authorities when deciding appeals on Human Rights grounds, against refusal of leave to enter or remain, under section 65. In each case the asylum applicant had had his own . .
Cited – Pham v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-Mar-2015
The court was asked: ‘whether the Secretary of State was precluded under the British Nationality Act 1981 from making an order depriving the appellant of British citizenship because to do so would render him stateless. This turns on whether (within . .
Cited – Allen v The United Kingdom ECHR 12-Jul-2013
The applicant alleged under Article 6 ss 2 of the Convention that the decision, following her acquittal, to refuse her compensation for a miscarriage of justice violated her right to be presumed innocent. . .
Cited – Re B (A Child) (Care Proceedings: Threshold Criteria) SC 12-Jun-2013
B had been removed into care at birth. The parents now appealed against a care order made with a view to B’s adoption. The Court was asked as to the situation where the risks were necessarily only anticipated, and as to appeals against a finding of . .
Cited – C, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 9-Feb-2016
The Court was asked whether, in the context of awarding Jobseeker’s Allowance, the State has unjustifiably interfered with the right of transgender persons to have information about their gender reassignment kept private.
Held: The appeal . .
Cited – McGraddie v McGraddie and Another (Scotland) SC 31-Jul-2013
The parties were father and son, living at first in the US. On the son’s wife becoming seriously ill, the son returned to Scotland. The father advanced a substantal sum for the purchase of a property to live in, but the son put the properties in his . .
Cited – Abela and Others v Baadarani SC 26-Jun-2013
The claimants sought damages alleging fraud in a company share purchase. They said that their lawyer had secretly been working for the sellers. The claim form had been issued, but the claimant had delayed in requesting permission for its service . .

Cited by:
Cited – Re Al M (Children) CA 28-Feb-2020
Publication of Children judgment – wide publicity
F brought wardship proceedings in respect of M and F’s two children, seeking their return to Dubai. F was the Ruler of the Emirate of Dubai. Media companies now sought publication of earlier judgments, and F appealed from an order for their . .
Cited – Rhuppiah v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 14-Nov-2018
Ms R had overstayed, but resisted deportation claiming a long term relationship with a man for who she cared. Her leave was continued 11 times. A Seventh Day Adventist, the care she provided was as a friend. Indefinite leave to remain was refused . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 18 October 2021; Ref: scu.620171

Regina v Kellam, Ex Parte South Wales Police Authority: QBD 2 Jul 1999

An officer victimised on duty by fellow officers and suffering stress had been injured in the execution of his duty for the legislation, and so was entitled to claim benefits under the Pensions Regulations. The officer suffered harassment after his wife, also an officer, complained about malpractice in her unit. The causal connection test need not be applied in any legalistic way.
Times 24-Aug-1999, [1999] EWHC Admin 627
Bailii
Police Pensions Regulations 1987 (1987 No 257)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Merseyside Police Authority v Police Medical Appeal Board and others Admn 23-Jan-2009
Two police officers had been granted additional retirement annuities on the basis that they had been injured in the execution of their duty. The chief constable denied this. A police officer who was on annual leave was injured whilst exercising the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 September 2021; Ref: scu.85338

AR, Regina (on The Application of) v The Greater Manchester Police and Another: Admn 5 Sep 2013

The claimant sought judicial review of the enhanced criminal record issued by the respondents when he sought a licence as a private hire driver. He had been tried and acquitted on a charge of rape.
Held: The request for review failed.
After referring to Allen v UK, the judge said or article 6: ‘a) The aim of Article 6.2 (after acquittal) is to protect the individual who is acquitted from being treated in subsequent proceedings or by public officials as if in fact guilty of the offence charged. Contrary to Mr Southey’s submission that the disclosure here ‘implies that [the claimant] is guilty of a serious sexual offence’, in my view it does no such thing. In no way does it suggest that he should have been convicted, nor does it suggest that he in fact committed the acts complained of. What may fairly be implied is the suggestion that, notwithstanding the acquittal, he may in fact have committed the acts complained of; that does not, however, impugn the correctness of the acquittal, and I accept Mr Coppel’s submission that there is a valid distinction between a statement casting doubt on the correctness of an acquittal and a statement that suggests that, notwithstanding the acquittal, the claimant might have committed the acts alleged.
b) In my judgment, it is no breach of article 6(2) to imply, in a statement made lawfully under Section 113B(4) of the Police Act 1997, that, notwithstanding the acquittal, the claimant might in fact have committed the act complained of in a criminal charge. For such disclosure to be lawful, it must be justified under Article 8, as I have found this disclosure to be, and in my view that renders the disclosure lawful under the ECHR.’
Raynor QC HHJ
[2013] EWHC 2721 (Admin)
Bailii
Police Act 1997, European Convention on Human Rights 6(2)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – AR, Regina (on The Application of) v Greater Manchester Police and Another CA 10-Jun-2016
The claimant complained that despite his acquittal after trial on a charge of rape, the accusation was revealed by the defendant on application for an enhanced criminal record certificate.
Held: The information contained in the certificate . .
At Admn – AR, Regina (on The Application of) v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police and Another SC 30-Jul-2018
The appellant had been tried for and acquitted on a criminal charge. He now challenged the disclosure by the respondent of the charge in an Enhanced Criminal Record Certificate.
Held: His appeal failed. The critical question was whether the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 August 2021; Ref: scu.584693

Aru, Regina (on The Application of) v The Chief Constable of Merseyside: CA 30 Jan 2004

Appeal against cautioning after allege public order offence on basis that it had been given other than in accordance with guidelines.
Waller, Longmore, Maurice Kay LJJ
[2004] EWCA Civ 199, [2004] 1 WLR 1697
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Belhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another SC 4-Jul-2018
Challenge to decision not to prosecute senior Intelligence Service officials for alleged offences in connection with his unlawful rendition and mistreatment in Libya. The issue here was whether on the hearing of the application for judicial review, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.572362

Amin v Director General of The Security Service (MI5) and Others: QBD 26 Jun 2013

The claimant sought damages for personal injury and false imprisonment.
Held: The claim was struck out as an abuse of process. There was an overlap with findings made against him in the Crown Court in a voir dire taking place in the course of his earlier conviction and sentence.
Irwin J
[2013] EWHC 1579 (QB)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police HL 19-Nov-1981
No collateral attack on Jury findigs.
An attempt was made to open up in a civil action, allegations of assaults by the police prior to the making of confessions which had been disposed of in a voir dire in the course of a criminal trial. The plaintiffs had imprisoned having spent many . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Amin v Director General of The Security Service and Others CA 26-Jun-2015
The claimant’s claims against the police had been struck out as a collateral attack on a criminal court decision.
Held: ‘If the former decision was made in criminal proceedings leading to a conviction, it is proper to focus attention on the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 17 June 2021; Ref: scu.511090

Woods v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis: CA 26 May 1995

The court in considering the period of detention of the claimant, asked itself whether the circumstances were such that the decision of the custody sergeant was unreasonable in the sense that no custody sergeant, applying common sense to the competing considerations before him, could have continued to detain the suspect.
Nourse, Beldam and Kennedy LJJ
Unreported, 26 May 1995
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Taylor (A Child Proceeding By his Mother and Litigation Friend C M Taylor) v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police CA 6-Jul-2004
The Chief Constable appealed aganst a finding that his officers had wrongfully arrested and imprisoned the claimant. The claimant was 10 years old when arrested, and complained that the officers had not properly advised him of the nature and purpose . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 June 2021; Ref: scu.198675

Taylor and Others v Director of The Serious Fraud Office and Others: HL 22 Jan 1998

Taylor_SFOHL1998
References: Times 04-Nov-1998, [1998] UKHL 39, [1999] 2 AC 177, [1998] 4 All ER 801, [1998] 3 WLR 1040
Links: House of Lords, Bailii
Coram: Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Hutton
Ratio: The defendant had requested the Isle of Man authorities to investigate the part if any taken by the plaintiff in a major fraud. No charges were brought against the plaintiff, but the documents showing suspicion came to be disclosed in the later trial of others. The plaintiff sought damages in defamation.
Held: The documents which had been prepared for a criminal investigation, and which were disclosed as part of prosecution case, but not relied on in that prosecution, may only be used by defence for the purposes of that trial. They cannot be used to form the basis of an action for defamation. The documents were disclosed under an obligation imposed on the prosecution. The absolute immunity rule ‘is designed to encourage freedom of speech and communication in judicial proceedings by relieving persons who take part in the judicial process from the fear of being sued for something they say.’ The immunity extended also to statements made out of court which could fairly be said to be part of the process of investigating crime. The court referred in this connection to investigators and the prosecuting officials with whom they are required to communicate.
Lord Hope (with whom Lord Hutton agreed) observed: ‘I do not think that it is possible to overstate the importance, in the public interest, of ensuring that material which is disclosed in criminal proceedings is not used for collateral purposes’.
Lord Hoffmann said: ‘I find it impossible to identify any rational principle which would confine the immunity for out of court statements to persons who are subsequently called as witnesses. The policy of the immunity is to enable people to speak freely without fear of being sued, whether successfully or not. If this object is to be achieved, the person in question must know at the time he speaks whether or not the immunity will attach. If it depends upon the contingencies of whether he will be called as a witness, the value of the immunity is destroyed. At the time of the investigation it is often unclear whether any crime has been committed at all. Persons assisting the police with their inquiries may not be able to give any admissible evidence; for example, their information may be hearsay, but none the less valuable for the purposes of the investigation. But the proper administration of justice requires that such people should have the same inducement to speak freely as those whose information subsequently forms the basis of evidence at a trial.
When one turns to the position of investigators, it seems to me that the same degree of necessity applies. It would be an incoherent rule which gave a potential witness immunity in respect of the statements which he made to an investigator but offered no similar immunity to the investigator if he passed that information to a colleague engaged in the investigation or put it to another potential witness. In my view it is necessary for the administration of justice that investigators should be able to exchange information, theories and hypotheses among themselves and to put them to other persons assisting in the inquiry without fear of being sued if such statements are disclosed in the course of the proceedings.’
This case cites:

  • Appeal from – Taylor Monarch Assurance Plc v Director of Serious Fraud Office, McKenzie, Law Society Rogerson CA (Gazette 24-Sep-97, Times 27-Aug-97, Bailii, [1997] EWCA Civ 2163)
    Qualified privilege attached to defamatory documents which had been prepared as part of a criminal investigation. For the court to allow an action would be approve a form of parasitic attack on the trial. . .
  • Cited – Mahon v Rahn QBD (Unreported, 19 June 1996)
    Directors of a London firm of stockbrokers brought libel proceedings against two Swiss bankers.
    Held: The absolute immunity which is given to both witnesses and potential witnesses extends to all those taking part in a criminal investigation . .
  • Cited – Mahon, Kent v Dr Rahn, Biedermann, Haab-Biedermann, Rahn, and Bodmer (a Partnership) (No 2) CA (Times 14-Jun-00, Gazette 29-Jun-00, Bailii, [2000] EWCA Civ 185, [2000] 1 WLR 2150, [2000] EMLR 873, [2000] Po LR 210, [2000] 2 All ER (Comm) 1, [2000] 4 All ER 41)
    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 – Munster v Lamb CA ((1883) 11 QBD 588)
    Judges and witness, including police officers are given immunity from suit in defamation in court proceedings.
    Fry LJ said: ‘Why should a witness be able to avail himself of his position in the box and to make without fear of civil consequences . .
  • Cited – Watson v M’Ewan HL ([1905] AC 480, [1905] UKHL 1, Bailii, (1905) 13 SLT 340, (1905) 7 F (HL) 109)
    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 – Home Office v Hariette Harman HL ([1983] 1 AC 280, [1982] 2 WLR 338, [1982] 1 All ER 532, (1982) 126 SJ 136)
    The defendant had permitted a journalist to see documents revealed to her as in her capacity as a solicitor in the course of proceedings.
    Held: The documents were disclosed under an obligation to use them for the instant case only. That rule . .
  • Cited – Evans v London Hospital Medical College and Others ([1981] 1 WLR 184, [1981] 1 All ER 715)
    The defendants employed by the first defendant carried out a post mortem on the plaintiff’s infant son. They found concentrations of morphine and told the police. The plaintiff was charged with the murder of her son. After further investigation no . .
  • Cited – Regina v Ward (Judith) CACD (Gazette 15-Jul-92, [1993] 1 WLR 619, (1993) 96 Cr App Rep 1)
    The defendant had been wrongly convicted of IRA bombings. She said that the prosecution had failed to disclose evidence.
    Held: The prosecution’s forensic scientists are under a common law duty to disclose to the defence anything they may . .
  • Cited – X (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council; M (A Minor) and Another v Newham London Borough Council; Etc HL (Independent 30-Jun-95, Times 30-Jun-95, [1995] 2 AC 633, Bailii, [1995] UKHL 9, [1995] 2 FLR 276, [1995] 3 All ER 353, [1995] 3 WLR 152, [1995] 3 FCR 337, (1995) 7 Admin LR 705, 94 LGR 313, [1995] Fam Law 537, [1995] 3 FCR 337)
    Damages were to be awarded against a Local Authority for breach of statutory duty in a care case, only if the statute was clear that damages were capable of being awarded. in the ordinary case a breach of statutory duty does not, by itself, give . .
  • Cited – Regina v Keane CACD (Independent 16-Mar-94, Times 15-Mar-94, [1994] 1 WLR 746, [1994] 2 All ER 478, (1994) 99 Cr App R 1)
    Public Interest Immunity Certificates for the protection of informants must be used only carefully. The Crown must specify the purpose of the public interest immunity certificate. The principles on disclosure in Ward are not limited to scientific . .
  • Cited – Mahon and Another v Rahn and Others (1) CA (Times 12-Jun-97, [1998] QB 424)
    Two company directors sued Swiss bankers who had responded to enquiries from the police in London. The charges which followed had been dismissed, and the directors sued in defamation, seeking to rely upon the materials sent to the police.
  • Cited – Regina v Brown (Winston) HL (Gazette 03-Sep-97, House of Lords, Bailii, [1997] UKHL 33, [1998] AC 367, [1997] 3 All ER 769, [1997] 3 WLR 447, [1998] 1 Cr App Rep 66)
    The victim had been stabbed outside a nightclub. Two witnesses identified the defendant. The defendants complained that evidence had not been disclosed to them.
    Held: There is no duty at common law on the prosecution to warn the defence of . .
  • Cited – Prudential Assurance Co Ltd v Fountain Page Ltd ([1991] 1 WLR 756)
    A party and his legal representatives receiving documents under a process of discovery is under an implied undertaking to use those documents for the purposes of those proceedings only. It is an obligation imposed by operation of law by virtue of . .
  • Cited – Ex parte Coventry Newspapers Ltd CA ([1993] QB 278, [1993] 1 All ER 86, [1992] 3 WLR 916)
    Documents had been disclosed by the Police Complaints Authority under court order for an appeal against conviction. They related to an investigation of the conduct of police officers who had given evidence against the appellant. The newspaper, now . .
  • Cited – Marrinan v Vibart CA ([1963] 1 QB 528, [1962] 3 All ER 380)
    Two police officers gave evidence in a criminal prosecution of others, that the plaintiff, a barrister, had behaved improperly by obstructing a police officer in the execution of his duty and subsequently gave similar evidence at an inquiry before . .
  • Cited – Roy v Prior HL ([1971] AC 470, [1970] 2 All ER 729)
    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: . .
  • Cited – Bennett v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis Admn (Times 24-Oct-97, (1997) 10 Admin LR 245)
    Police and prosecuting authority have no inherent immunity from suit for tort of misfeasance in public office if the breach is properly made out. Immunity extends to statements made or agreed to be made out of court ‘if these were clearly and . .
  • Cited – Silcott v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis CA (Times 09-Jul-96, [1996] 8 Admin LR 633, Bailii, [1996] EWCA Civ 1311)
    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 – Attorney-General’s Guidelines Practice Note (Criminal Evidence: Unused Material) ([1982] 1 All ER 734)
    . .
  • Cited – Regina v Jeffries CACD ([1968] CLY 661)
    . .
  • Cited – Regina v Ward (Judith) CACD (Gazette 15-Jul-92, [1993] 1 WLR 619, (1993) 96 Cr App Rep 1)
    The defendant had been wrongly convicted of IRA bombings. She said that the prosecution had failed to disclose evidence.
    Held: The prosecution’s forensic scientists are under a common law duty to disclose to the defence anything they may . .
  • Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Shannon ([1974] CLY 546)
    . .
  • Cited – Regina v Maguire CACD ([1992] 2 All ER 433, [1992] QB 936, (1992) 94 Cr App Rep 133 , [2006] EWCA Crim 1239)
    The defendant, convicted of murder, had died. It later came to light that materials with the prosecution forensic team had not been disclosed by the prosecution.
    Held: The Home Secretary could make a reference to the Appeal court despite the . .
  • Cited – Regina v Davis; Regina v Rowe; Regina v Johnson CA (Gazette 10-Mar-93, [1993] 1 WLR 613, [1993] 97 Cr App R 110)
    Guidance was given on the procedures to be followed for applications for non-disclosure for public interest immunity. The court identified three types of case. In the first, and most frequent case the prosecution must notify the defence of the . .
  • Cited – Regina v Brown (Winston) CACD (Independent 22-Jun-94, Gazette 31-Aug-94, Times 20-Jun-94, [1994] 1 WLR 1599)
    The Crown Prosecution Service was under no obligation to disclose evidence which might be damaging to a Defendant’s witness’ credibility. The Attorney General’s disclosure guidelines do not have the force of law and need updating. . .
  • Cited – D v National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children HL ([1978] AC 171, [1977] 2 WLR 201, [1977] 1 All ER 589, Bailii, [1977] UKHL 1)
    Immunity from disclosure of their identity should be given to those who gave information about neglect or ill treatment of children to a local authority or the NSPCC similar to that which the law allowed to police informers.
    Lord Simon of . .

(This list may be incomplete)
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Darker v Chief Constable of The West Midlands Police HL (Gazette 17-Aug-00, Times 01-Aug-00, House of Lords, Bailii, [2000] UKHL 44, [2001] AC 435, [2000] 3 WLR 747)
    The plaintiffs had been indicted on counts alleging conspiracy to import drugs and conspiracy to forge traveller’s cheques. During the criminal trial it emerged that there had been such inadequate disclosure by the police that the proceedings were . .
  • Cited – Preston Borough Council v McGrath CA (Bailii, [2000] EWCA Civ 151)
    The defendant had been investigated for fraud against the claimant. He had disclosed documents to the police, but now complained at their use in the civil proceedings against him.
    Held: The document had not been given to the police under . .
  • Appealed to – Taylor Monarch Assurance Plc v Director of Serious Fraud Office, McKenzie, Law Society Rogerson CA (Gazette 24-Sep-97, Times 27-Aug-97, Bailii, [1997] EWCA Civ 2163)
    Qualified privilege attached to defamatory documents which had been prepared as part of a criminal investigation. For the court to allow an action would be approve a form of parasitic attack on the trial. . .
  • Cited – Regina v Legal Aid Board ex parte Kaim Todner (a Firm of Solicitors) CA (Times 15-Jun-98, Gazette 01-Jul-98, Bailii, [1998] EWCA Civ 958, [1999] QB 966, [1998] 3 All ER 541, [1998] 3 WLR 925)
    A firm of solicitors sought an order for anonymity in their proceedings against the LAB, saying that being named would damage their interests irrespective of the outcome.
    Held: The legal professions have no special part in the law as a party . .
  • Cited – Bowman v Fels (Bar Council and Others intervening) CA ([2005] 4 All ER 609, Bailii, [2005] EWCA Civ 226, Times 14-Mar-05, [2006] 1 WLR 3083)
    The parties had lived together in a house owned in the defendant’s name and in which she claimed an interest. The claimant’s solicitors notified NCIS that they thought the defendant had acted illegally in setting off against his VAT liability the . .
  • Cited – A, Re Application for Judicial Review QBNI (Bailii, [2001] NIQB 21)
    The applicant, who feared for his life if identified, sought the release to him of materials discovered by the police in searching premises associated with a loyalist paramiliitary group. He thought that they might include information sourced form . .
  • Cited – General Medical Council v Professor Sir Roy Meadow, Attorney General CA (Bailii, [2006] EWCA Civ 1390, Times 31-Oct-06, [2007] 2 WLR 286, (2006) 92 BMLR 51, [2007] 1 All ER 1, [2006] 3 FCR 447, [2007] LS Law Medical 1, [2007] Fam Law 214, [2007] ICR 701, [2007] QB 462, 92 BMLR 51, [2007] 1 FLR 1398, [2006] 44 EG 196)
    The GMC appealed against the dismissal of its proceedings for professional misconduct against the respondent doctor, whose expert evidence to a criminal court was the subject of complaint. The doctor said that the evidence given by him was . .
  • Cited – H, Regina v (Interlocutory application: Disclosure) HL (Times 02-Mar-07, Bailii, [2007] UKHL 7, [2007] 3 All ER 269, [2007] Crim LR 731, [2007] 2 Cr App Rep 6, [2007] 2 AC 270)
    The trial judge had refused an order requested at a preparatory hearing by the defence for the disclosure of documents held by the prosecutor. The House was now asked whether a right of appeal existed against such a refusal.
    Held: The practice . .
  • Cited – Buckley v Dalziel QBD (Bailii, [2007] EWHC 1025 (QB), Times 07-Jun-07, [2007] 1 WLR 2933, [2007] EMLR 624, [2007] EMLR 23)
    There was a heated dispute between neighbours, culminating in some generous or perhaps over-generous pruning by the claimant of the defendant’s trees and shrubs on the boundaries. The defendants reported the matter to the police. Both Mr and Mrs . .
  • Cited – Westcott v Westcott QBD (Bailii, [2007] EWHC 2501 (QB))
    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 – Westcott v Westcott CA (Bailii, [2008] EWCA Civ 818, Times 27-Aug-08, [2009] QB 407, [2009] 2 WLR 838, [2009] 1 All ER 727, [2009] EMLR 2)
    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 – Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd and others QBD ([2009] EMLR 18, Bailii, [2009] EWHC 411 (QB))
    The claimant police officer complained of an alleged defamation in an article published by the defendant. The defendant wished to obtain information from the IPCC to show that they were investigating the matter as a credible issue. The court . .
  • Cited – White v Southampton University Hospitals NHS Trust and Another QBD (Bailii, [2011] EWHC 825 (QB))
    The claimant doctor sued in defamation for letters written by the defendants to the Fitness to Practice Directorate. She now sought to appeal against a finding that she could not rely upon one letter which had come to her attention through . .
  • Cited – Nunn v Suffolk Constabulary and Another Admn (Bailii, [2012] EWHC 1186 (Admin))
    The claimant had been convicted of murder and his appeal had failed. He now sought disclosure of the forensic material held by the police to his own legal team.
    Held: Permission to apply for review was granted, but the claim failed. ‘It is . .
  • Cited – Smart v The Forensic Science Service Ltd CA (Bailii, [2013] EWCA Civ 783)
    On a search of his house, the police found a bullet cartridge on the claimant’s property. It was sent for testing but due to a mistake it was reported as a live cartridge. The prosecution was only dropped after some months when the mistake was . .
  • Cited – Tchenguiz v Director of The Serious Fraud Office and Others CA (Bailii, [2014] EWCA Civ 1409)
    The appellant challenged an order of the Commercial Court refusing permission for documents disclosed in English litigation to be used in litigation proceedings in Guernsey. The principal issue is whether the judge correctly weighed up the . .
  • Cited – Singh v Moorlands Primary School and Another CA (Bailii, [2013] EWCA Civ 909, [2013] IRLR 820, [2013] WLR(D) 306, [2013] 1 WLR 3052, [2013] ICR 1158, [2013] CP Rep 46)
    The claimant was a non-wite head teacher, alleging that her school governors and local authority had undermined and had ‘deliberately endorsed a targeted campaign of discrimination, bullying, harassment and victimisation’ against her as an Asian . .

(This list may be incomplete)
Leading Case
Last Update: 07 August 2018
Ref: 135006

London Assurance Company v Sainsbury: 28 Jun 1783

References: (1783) 3 Dougl 246, [1783] EngR 109, (1783) 3 Doug 245, (1783) 99 ER 636
Links: Commonlii
Coram: Mansfield L, Butler, Willes, Ashurst, JJ
Ratio: An insurance otlice having paid the assured the amount of the loss sustained by him in consequence of a demolishing by rioters, sued the hundredors under the stat. I G. 1, at. 2, e. 5, s. 6, in their own names. HeId by Lord Mansfield and Butler, J. (Willes and Ashurst, J.J,, dissentient), that the office was not erititled to recover.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Simpson and Co v Thomson HL ((1877) 3 App Cas 279)
    The House discussed the extent of an insurer’s right of subrogation: ‘My Lords, these authorities seem to me to be conclusive that the right of the underwriters is merely to make such claim for damages as the insured himself could have made, and it . .
  • Cited – Caledonian North Sea Ltd v London Bridge Engineering Ltd and Others HL (House of Lords, Times 13-Feb-02, Bailii, [2002] UKHL 4, [2002] 1 LLR 553, [2002] Lloyds Rep IR 261, [2002] 1 All ER (Comm) 321, 2002 SLT 278, [2002] CLC 741, 2002 SC (HL) 117, [2002] BLR 139, 2002 SCLR 346, 2002 GWD 6-178)
    Substantial personal injury claims had been settled following the Piper Alpha disaster. Where a contractual indemnity had been provided under a contract, and insurance had also been taken out, but the insurance had not been a contractual . .

(This list may be incomplete)
Jurisdiction: England and Wales

Last Update: 01-Jan-18
Ref: 191157

Regina v Southampton Crown Court ex parte J and P; 21 Dec 1992

References: [1993] Crim LR 962
Coram: Watkins LJ, Auld LJ
Ratio: A special material warrant was quashed, partly because it was too widely drawn. It was suspected that there had been thefts from the solicitor’s firms client account. Watkins LJ discussed the need for a judge to give reasons for a decision under section 9 of the 1984 Act allowing the police to have access to special procedure materials: ‘The Act does not require a circuit judge to give reasons when making an order inter partes or issuing a warrant ex parte for access to special procedure material. However, challenges to decisions of circuit judges which have come before this Court demonstrate, in my opinion, especially as to ex parte applications, the need for this to be done. Reasons need not be elaborate, but they should be recorded and be sufficient to identify the substance of any relevant information or representation put before the judge in addition to the written information. They should set out what inferences he has drawn from the material relevant to the statutory conditions governing the content and form of the order or warrant sought. Where he has considered the question of legal privilege he should explain why, if he does, he has included in the order or warrant material which is prima facie privileged, or why he has excluded material as subject to privilege. In the latter case, where the excluded material consists of particular documents or categories of documents which might otherwise be included in the material to which access is given, he should explain why, if he does, he has included in the order or warrant material which is prima facie privileged, or why he has excluded material as subject to privilege. In the latter case, where the excluded material consists of particular documents or categories of documents which might otherwise be included in the material to which access is given, he should carefully describe and identify them in the order or warrant.
These requirements may seem onerous for the exercise of a power to which the police often seek recourse as a matter of urgency. But a Circuit Judge has a responsibility not only to assist the effective investigation of crime, but also to protect as needs be the holder of and the person in respect of whom he holds material in confidence from unjustified intrusion into their private affairs.’
Auld LJ said: ‘the fact that a solicitor is himself under investigation is not of itself necessarily a sufficient reason for ordering such an intrusion into his affairs and those of his clients. All the circumstances of the individual application must be taken into account, including, for example, the seriousness of the matter being investigated, the evidence already available to the police to found a prosecution based on it, and the extent to which the solicitor has already been put on notice of interest on his affairs such as might have caused him to hide or destroy or otherwise interfere with incriminating documents.’
Statutes: Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 9
This case is cited by:

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 05-Aug-16
Ref: 260138

Kuru v State of New South Wales; 12 Jun 2008

References: [2008] HCA 26
Links: Austlii
Ratio: Austlii (High Court of Australia) Torts – Trespass to land – Power of police to enter private premises – Police officers went to suburban flat after receiving report of male and female arguing – Police treated report as ‘violent domestic’ – Occupier invited police to ‘look around the flat’ – Occupier later asked police to leave premises – Police did not leave and remained on premises for longer than it would reasonably have taken them to leave – Whether statutory justification for police to remain on premises – Proper construction of Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) ss 357F and 357H – Whether express refusal by occupier immediately terminated authority of police ‘to so enter or remain’ on premises, irrespective of fulfilment of purposes for which entry effected.
Torts – Trespass to land – Power of police to enter private premises – Whether common law justification for police to remain on premises – Whether entry could be justified as directed to preventing a breach of the peace.
Words and phrases – ‘enter or remain’, ‘expressly refused’, ‘breach of the peace’.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Gillies -v- Procurator Fiscal, Elgin HCJ (Bailii, [2008] ScotHC HCJAC_55, 2008 GWD 31-476, 2008 SCCR 887, 2008 SCL 1316, 2008 SLT 978, 2009 JC 25, [2008] HCJAC 55)
    The police went to the defendant’s flat to find her boyfriend. She refused them access, but when they saw him, the police officers called out that he was under arrest under the 1995 Act, and forced their way past the door and the defendant. The . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 30-Jun-16
Ref: 276522

Holgate-Mohammad v Duke, orse Mohammed-Holgate v Duke: HL 1984

References: [1984] 1 AC 437, [1984] 2 WLR 660
Coram: Lord Diplock
Ratio: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 reasonable grounds for suspicion, and that the period of detention was not excessive. However the use of an arrest to place her under pressure was improper. On appeal the chief constable succeeded, the court saying that the question was whether the decision to arrest was Wednesbury unreasonable; was it made in good faith, and did it take into account any irrelevant factors.
Held: The idea that a suspect might more readily confess at a police station under arrest was a proper consideration, and given the reasonable cause for suspicion, the arrest was lawful.
Lord Diplock set out the common law principles as to what amounted to an arrest. Arrest is a continuing act. It starts with the arrester taking a person into his custody, either by action or by words restraining him from moving anywhere beyond the arrester’s control, and it continues until the person so restrained is either released from custody or remanded in custody by a judicial act. The mere act of taking a person into custody does not constitute an arrest unless the person knows, either at the time when he is taken into custody or as soon thereafter as it is reasonably practical to inform him, upon what charge or on suspicion of what crime he is being arrested.
The Wednesbury principles are applicable not only in proceedings for judicial review but also for the purpose of founding a cause of action at common law for trespass by false imprisonment.
Statutes: Criminal Law Act 1967 2(4)
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Shields -v- Merseyside Police CA (Bailii, [2010] EWCA Civ 1281)
    The claimant appealed against rejection of her claim for assault and false imprisonment. The officer arresting her wrongly believed that she had already been arrested, and it was said that he could not have gone through the steps necessary for an . .
  • Cited – Lumba (WL) -v- Secretary of State for The Home Department SC (Bailii, [2011] UKSC 12, Bailii Summary, SC, UKSC 2010/0062, UKSC 2010/0063, SC Summary)
    The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as . .
  • Cited – Richardson -v- The Chief Constable of West Midlands Police QBD (Bailii, [2011] EWHC 773 (QB), [2011] 2 Cr App Rep 1)
    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 . .
  • Cited – Kambadzi (previously referred to as SK (Zimbabwe)) -v- Secretary of State for The Home Department SC (2011] 1 WLR 1299, Bailii, [2011] UKSC 23, Bailii Summary, UKSC 2009/0022, SC Summary, SC)
    The respondent had held the claimant in custody, but had failed to follow its own procedures. The claimant appealed against the rejection of his claim of false imprisonment. He had overstayed his immigration leave, and after convictions had served a . .
  • Cited – Haile -v- London Borough of Waltham Forest SC (UKSC 2014/0185, SC Video, [2016] 1 All ER 579, [2015] 1 AC 1471, Bailii, [2015] UKSC 34, [2015] WLR(D) 234, [2015] 1 AC 1471, [2015] HLR 24, [2015] PTSR 784, [2015] 2 WLR 1441, WLRD, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary)
    ‘The question in this case is whether the appellant falls within the scope of section 193 of the Housing Act 1996 as amended, which applies, by virtue of subsection (1), where the local housing authority are satisfied that ‘an applicant is homeless, . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 28-Jun-16
Ref: 426031

Regina v Piggott; 2 Dec 1994

References: Unreported transcript 2 November 1994
Ratio The offender had pleaded guilty to two offences of robbery. He sought to rely on information he had provided to the police in mitigaion. At a hearing before the sentencing judge on 4 November 1993, the police provided the court with a text. At a further hearing on 24 November 1993, defence counsel indicated that there was further relevant material not set out in the text. Prosecuting counsel said he did not know if there was any more information. The judge adjourned sentence for 14 days to enable the defence to put matters before the prosecution. When the case was listed for sentence, there was no new material and the judge proceeded to sentence. The offender appealed and was granted leave on the basis that he had provided material to the court which, if confirmed by the police, would be relevant to sentence. The court directed that the prosecution attend on the appeal and that it should put itself in a position where it could confirm or not confirm the material put forward by the offender. When the appeal was brought on for hearing, no more information had been provided; after argument, the court directed that any relevant information be provided. When the court next sat for the hearing of the appeal, information was provided that broadly confirmed the matters that the offender had sought to have confirmed before the trial judge.
Held: The court was critical of the position taken by the police. It observed: ‘More important the sentencing judge was not made aware of matters of potential relevance to his sentencing decision when the interests of justice required that he should have been given the information now available to this court.
The position facing police officers in the present context is never straight forward and requires careful judgment. However, we reject any suggestion that the decision whether to provide a text or not is simply a matter for the discretion of the police. In principle, if a defendant seeks to put material before the court by way of mitigation, which the court will not begin to consider unless confirmed in writing by the prosecution authority, then accurate information in the appropriate form confirming or refuting, in whole or in part, the assertions made by or on behalf of the defendant should be made available to the sentencing court by the prosecution.’
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – AXN -v- The Queen CACD (Bailii, [2016] EWCA Crim 590)
    The defendant argued that geater note should have been taken on his sentencing to allow for the assistance he had given to the police after his arrest.
    Held: the current accepted practice is that the tesxt of the letter from the police to the . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 28-May-16
Ref: 564848

Regina v Mentuck; 15 Nov 2001

References: [2001] 3 SCR 442, 2001 SCC 76
Links: anlii
Coram: McLachlin C.J. and L’Heureux-Dube, Gonthier, Iacobucci, Major, Bastarache, Binnie, Arbour and LeBel JJ.
Canlii Ratio Supreme Court of Canada – Courts – Supreme Court of Canada – Jurisdiction – Publication bans – Criminal proceedings – Trial judge granting one-year ban as to identity of undercover police officers and refusing ban as to operational methods used in investigating accused – Whether Supreme Court of Canada has jurisdiction to hear Crown appeal from trial judge’s order – Supreme Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S-26, s. 40(1), (3).
Criminal law – Publication bans – Appropriate scope of publication ban – Undercover police investigation – Crown seeking publication ban protecting identity of police officers and operational methods used in investigating accused – Trial judge granting one-year ban as to identity of officers and refusing ban as to operational methods – Whether trial judge erred in ordering ban.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – A -v- British Broadcasting Corporation (Scotland) SC ([2015] 1 AC 588, 2014 SC (UKSC) 151, 2014 SCLR 593, Bailii, [2014] UKSC 25, [2014] 2 All ER 1037, 2014 GWD 15-266, [2014] WLR(D) 196, [2014] 2 WLR 1243, [2014] EMLR 25, 2014 SLT 613, WLRD, Bailii Summary, UKSC 2013/0159, SC Summary, SC)
    The BBC challenged an order made by the Court of Session in judicial review proceedings, permitting the applicant review to delete his name and address and substituting letters of the alphabet, in the exercise (or, as the BBC argues, purported . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 17-May-16
Ref: 564189

Hill v Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Police Services Board; 4 Oct 2007

References: [2007] 3 SCR 129, 2007 SCC 41 (CanLII), 40 MPLR (4th) 1, 230 OAC 260, 160 ACWS (3d) 573, [2007] SCJ No 41 (QL), JE 2007-1867, [2007] CarswellOnt 6265, 64 Admin LR (4th) 163, 50 CCLT (3d) 1, 368 NR 1, 50 CR (6th) 279, 285 DLR (4th) 620, 87 OR (3d) 397, [2007] 3 SCR 129, 2007 SCC 41 (CanLII)
Links: Canlii, Canlii
Coram: McLachlin CJ and Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella, Charron and Rothstein JJ
Canlii Supreme Court of Canada – Torts – Negligence – Duty of care – Police investigation – Whether police owe duty of care to suspects in criminal investigations – If so, standard of care required by police investigating a suspect – Whether police officers’ conduct in investigating suspect was negligent.
Police – Investigation – Negligence – Whether Canadian law recognizes tort of negligent investigation.
This case is cited by:

(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 21-Dec-15 Ref: 556825

Minister of Safety and Security v Hamilton; 26 Sep 2003

References: [2003] ZASCA 98, [2003] 4 All SA 117 (SCA)
Links: Saflii
Coram: Howie P, Mthiyane, Conradie, Heher JJA and Van Heerden AJA
South Africa: Supreme Court of Appeal – Subject: Delict – police – legal duty to exercise reasonable care in considering, investigating & recommending application for firearm licence – liability for shooting by unfit person to whom firearm licence issued
The police were held liable to the victim of a shooting for negligently issuing a firearm licence to the attacker, who had a history of psychosis, personality disorder and alcohol abuse. The agreed statement of facts did not suggest that the victim was at higher risk than any other member of the public.
This case is cited by:

(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 21-Dec-15 Ref: 556823

Doe v Metropolitan Toronto (Municipality) Commissioners of Police; 30 Aug 1990

References: 74 OR (2d) 225, 72 DLR (4th) 580, 5 CCLT (2d) 77, [1990] OJ No 1584 (QL), 10 WCB (2d) 577, 1 CRR (2d) 211, 50 CPC (2d) 92, 40 OAC 161, 22 ACWS (3d) 869
Links: Canlii
Coram: O’Leary, Saunders and Moldaver JJ
Ontario – High Court of Justice, Divisional Court – Negligence — Duty of care — Police not warning potential victim of serial rapist due to stereotypical belief that her hysterical response to warning would scare off rapist and make apprehension more difficult.
Constitutional law — Charter of Rights — Right to life, liberty and security — Police not warning potential victim of serial rapist due to stereotypical belief that her hysterical response to warning would scare off rapist and make apprehension more difficult — Charter rights violated — Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 7.
Constitutional law — Charter of Rights — Equality rights — Police not warning potential victim of serial rapist due to stereotypical belief that her hysterical response to warning would scare off rapist and make apprehension more difficult — Charter rights violated — Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 15(1).
On August 24, 1986, the plaintiff was raped by a serial rapist who subsequently pleaded guilty to a number of sexual assaults including the attack on the plaintiff. All of the attacks occurred within a one-year period in the same vicinity and involved single white women living in second or third floor apartments to which the rapist gained entry through a balcony door. In this action, the plaintiff sued the Chief of Police at the time of the assault, the investigating officers in charge of the case and the Board of Commissioners of Police for damages. The plaintiff alleged a cause of action in tort and a cause of action for violating her rights to security of the person and her right to equal protection under ss. 7 and 15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The defendants moved to have the action dismissed as not disclosing a cause of action. The motion was dismissed. Leave having been granted, the defendants appealed.
Held, the appeal should be dismissed and the plaintiff’s action allowed to proceed.
This case is cited by:

(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 21-Dec-15 Ref: 556824

Carmichele v Minister of Safety and Security; 16 Aug 2001

References: (2001) 12 BHRC 60, [2001] ZACC 22, 2001 (4) SA 938 (CC), 2001 (10) BCLR 995 (CC)
Links: Saflii
Coram: Ackermann, Goldstone JJ
Constitutional Court of South Africa – The applicant had been assaulted by a man awaiting trial for attempted rape. Both police and prosecutor had recommended bail despite a history of sexual violence. She applicant sued the ministers responsible for the police and prosecution service, saying that they had failed to ensure that the magistrate was properly informed about the risk he posed to women in the vicinity of his home, including the applicant. Her claim was dismissed by the High Court and its decision was upheld by the Supreme Court of Appeal, but she succeeded on appeal to the Constitutional Court, relying on a provision in section 39(2) of the constitution which required the courts when developing the common law to ‘promote the spirit, purport and objects of the Bill of Rights’. The Constitutional Court decided that it would not be appropriate for itself to determine whether the law of delict required to be developed so as to afford a right to the applicant to claim damages if the police or prosecutor were negligent. It said that it was by no means clear how the constitutional obligations on the state should translate into private law duties towards individuals, and that the court would be at a grave disadvantage in deciding the issue without a fully reasoned judgment of the High Court or Court of Appeal. It set aside the decisions of the lower courts and remitted the matter to the High Court.
This case is cited by:

(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 20-Dec-15 Ref: 556811

The King v Charles Pinney, Esquire; 1 Nov 1832

References: , [1832] EngR 777, (1832) 3 B & Ad 947, (1832) 110 ER 349
Links: Commonlii
Coram: Littledale J
The case of the Bristol Riots. Littledale J said that, although the posse comitatus might be called out by a justice of the peace, it was generally done by the sheriff.
This case is cited by:

(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 20-Nov-15 Ref: 319724

Mason v Sainsbury; 19 Apr 1782

References: (1782) 3 Dougl 61, [1782] EngR 37, (1782) 3 Doug 61, (1782) 99 ER 538
Links: Commonlii
Coram: Lord Mansfield CJ, Buller J
A claim was made upon insurance after a riot. The court asked asked ‘Who is first liable?’ This was not an issue of chronology but of establishing where the primary responsibility lay to make good the loss. The Act laid the primary responsibility with the inhabitants of the hundred, and it did not matter that the insurer had indemnified the insured. Lord Mansfield said: ‘The facts of this case lie in a narrow compass. The argument turns much on want of precision in stating the case, as most arguments do. The office paid without suit, not in ease of the hundred, and not as co-obligors, but without prejudice. It is, to all intents, as if it had not been paid. The question, then, comes to this, can the owner, having insured, sue the hundred? Who is first liable? If the hundred, it makes no difference; if the insurer, then it is a satisfaction, and the hundred is not liable. But the contrary is evident from the nature of the contract of insurance. It is an indemnity. Every day the insurer is put in the place of the insured. In every abandonment it is so. The insurer uses the name of the insured. The case is clear: the Act puts the hundred, for civil purposes, in the place of the trespassers; and, upon principles of policy, as in the case of other remedies against the hundred, I am satisfied that it is to be considered as if the insurers had not paid a farthing.’
Buller J said: ‘The better way is to consider this as a contract of indemnity. The principle is, that the insurer and insured are one, and, in that light, paying before or after can make no difference. I am, therefore, clearly of opinion, that the hundred cannot avail themselves of this defence.’ and ‘It has been admitted, and rightly, that the hundred is put in the place of the trespassers.’
Willes J said: ‘I am of the same opinion . . The hundred is not answerable criminally, but they cannot be considered as free from blame. They may have been negligent, which is partly the principle of the Act.’
Statutes: Riot Act 1714
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Simpson & Co -v- Thomson HL ((1877) 3 App Cas 279)
    The House discussed the extent of an insurer’s right of subrogation: ‘My Lords, these authorities seem to me to be conclusive that the right of the underwriters is merely to make such claim for damages as the insured himself could have made, and it . .
  • Cited – Caledonian North Sea Ltd -v- London Bridge Engineering Ltd and Others HL (House of Lords, Times 13-Feb-02, Bailii, [2002] UKHL 4)
    Substantial personal injury claims had been settled following the Piper Alpha disaster. Where a contractual indemnity had been provided under a contract, and insurance had also been taken out, but the insurance had not been a contractual . .
  • Cited – Yarl’s Wood Immigration Ltd and Others -v- Bedfordshire Police Authority CA (Bailii, [2009] EWCA Civ 1110, [2010] 2 WLR 1322, [2010] 2 All ER 221)
    The claimant sought to recover the costs of damage to their centre following a riot, saying that under the 1886 Act, they were liable. It appealed against a ruling that they were unable to claim as a public authority, saying that the 1886 Act was . .

Last Update: 11-Sep-15 Ref: 191156

Regina (Jones) v Chief Constable of Cheshire Constabulary; 31 Oct 2005

References: Times 04-Nov-2005
The claimant challenged the revocation by the respondent of his pedlar’s licence. He had been arrested on a charge involving dishonesty, and his certificate was taken from him and held.
Held: The powers available were to the police to refuse to renew a certificate or to a magistrates court to revoke licence. The police did not have the power to do as they had. The declaration was granted.
Statutes: Pedlar’s Act 1871 5(1)

Regina v Grant; 17 Jul 2009

References: 2009 SCC 32, [2009] 2 SCR 353, 309 DLR (4th) 1, 245 CCC (3d) 1, 66 CR (6th) 1, 253 OAC 124
Links: Canlii
Coram: McLachlin CJ and Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ
Canlii (Supreme Court of Canada) Constitutional law – Charter of Rights – Arbitrary detention – Right to counsel – Encounter between accused and police going from general neighbourhood policing to situation where police effectively took control over accused and attempted to elicit incriminating information – Whether police conduct would cause a reasonable person in accused’s position to conclude that he or she was not free to go and had to comply with police demand – Whether accused arbitrarily detained – Whether accused’s right to counsel infringed – Meaning of ‘detention’ in ss. 9 and 10 of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Constitutional law – Charter of Rights – Enforcement – Exclusion of evidence – Firearm discovered as result of accused’s statements taken in breach of his right against arbitrary detention and right to counsel – Firearm admitted into evidence at trial and accused convicted of five firearms offences – Whether admission of firearm bringing administration of justice into disrepute – Revised framework for determining whether evidence obtained in breach of constitutional rights must be excluded – Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 24(2).
Criminal law – Firearms – Possession of firearm for purposes of weapons trafficking – Whether simple movement of firearm from one place to another without changing hands amounts to weapons trafficking – Meaning of ‘transfer’ of weapon for purposes of ss. 84, 99 and 100 of Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Ambrose -v- Harris, Procurator Fiscal, Oban, etc SC (Bailii, [2011] UKSC 43, Bailii Summary, SC Summary, SC, UKSC 2011/0101, 2011 SLT 1005, [2011] 1 WLR 2435)
    (Scotland) The appellant had variously been convicted in reliance on evidence gathered at different stages before arrest, but in each case without being informed of any right to see a solicitor. The court was asked, as a devolution issue, at what . .

McGowan v Chief Constable of Kingston Upon Hull; 21 Oct 1967

References: Times 21-Oct-1967
Coram: Parker LCJ, Widgery, O’Connor JJ
The defendant police officers had gone into a house where a child was being held in a man’s arms. The police officers said that they had reason to think that a breach of the peace might occur between the man and his mistress. The question arose as to whether the mistress had authority to give an invitation to the police officers to come in.
Held: Parker LCJ said: ‘Regardless of the invitation, there was sufficient to justify the police entering the house on the basis that they genuinely suspected a danger of breach of the peace occurring.’
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – McLeod, Mealing (deceased) -v- Metropolitan Police Commissioner CA (Ind Summary 21-Feb-94, Bailii, [1994] EWCA Civ 2, [1994] 4 All ER 553)
    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 . .

(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 27-Feb-16 Ref: 543044

Regina v Cox; 18 Sep 1992

References: (Unreported), 18 September 1992, Times 02-Dec-1992, [1992] CLY 886
Coram: Ognall J
Whether the questioning of a suspect in a police station amounted to an interview was a question of fact dependant upon all the circumstances, including the rest, arrival at the police station, caution, the notification of rights, and the nature of the questions asked. The defendant doctor administered potassium chloride to a dying patient. The court had to look to the ‘primary purpose’ of his act.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Airedale NHS Trust -v- Bland CA (lip, [1993] 2 WLR 316)
    The official Solicitor appealed a decision that doctors could withdraw medical treatment including artificial nutrition, from a patient in persistent vegetative state.
    Held: The doctors sought permission to act in accordance with recommended . .
  • Cited – Airedale NHS Trust -v- Bland HL (lip, [1993] AC 789, [1993] 2 WLR 316, Bailii, [1992] UKHL 5)
    The patient had been severely injured in the Hillsborough disaster, and had come to be in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). The doctors sought permission to withdraw medical treatment. The Official Solicitor appealed against an order of the Court . .
  • Cited – In Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) CA (Times 10-Oct-00, Bailii, [2000] EWCA Civ 254, [2001] 1 FLR 267, [2000] 4 All ER 961, [2001] Fam 147, [2001] 2 WLR 480, [2001] 9 BHRC 261, [2000] 3 FCR 577, [2001] Fam Law 18, (2001) 57 BMLR 1, [2000] Lloyd’s Rep Med 425, [2001] UKHRR 1)
    Twins were conjoined (Siamese). Medically, both could not survive, and one was dependent upon the vital organs of the other. Doctors applied for permission to separate the twins which would be followed by the inevitable death of one of them. The . .

Marper -v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Jan 2007

References: [2007] EHCR 110, 30562/04
Links: Bailii
Coram: J. Casadevall, P
Decision as to admissibility – the applicants complained of the retention by police of DNA and fingerprint samples and records.
Held: Admissible.
This case cites:

This case is cited by:

  • See Also – Marper -v United Kingdom; S -v- United Kingdom ECHR (Bailii, [2008] ECHR 178, 30562/04)
    Grand Chamber – Press Release – The applicant complained of the retention by the police of DNA and fingerprint records – The applicants both complain about the retention of their fingerprints and DNA samples and the fact that they are being used in . .
  • See Also – Marper -v- United Kingdom; S -v- United Kingdom ECHR (30562/04, Bailii, [2008] ECHR 1581, Times, (2008) 158 NLJ 1755, (2009) 48 EHRR 50, 25 BHRC 557, [2009] Crim LR 355)
    (Grand Chamber hearing) The applicants complained that on being arrested on suspicion, samples of their DNA had been taken, but despite being released without charge, the samples had retained on the Police database.
    Held: (Unanimous) The . .

Last Update: 30-Sep-15 Ref: 278517

Marper -v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom: ECHR 27 Feb 2008

References: [2008] ECHR 178, 30562/04
Links: Bailii
Grand Chamber – Press Release – The applicant complained of the retention by the police of DNA and fingerprint records – The applicants both complain about the retention of their fingerprints and DNA samples and the fact that they are being used in ongoing criminal investigations. They are also concerned about the possible future uses of those samples and, in general, that their retention casts suspicion on people who have been acquitted or discharged of crimes. They further contend that, as people without convictions who are no longer suspected criminals, they should be treated in the same way as the rest of the unconvicted population of the United Kingdom. They rely on Articles 8 (right to respect for private life) and 14 (prohibition of discrimination) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 16 August 2004 and declared admissible on 16 January 2007. The Chamber to which the case was assigned decided to relinquish jurisdiction to the Grand Chamber on 10 July 2007.
This case cites:

This case is cited by:

  • See Also – Marper -v- United Kingdom; S -v- United Kingdom ECHR (30562/04, Bailii, [2008] ECHR 1581, Times, (2008) 158 NLJ 1755, (2009) 48 EHRR 50, 25 BHRC 557, [2009] Crim LR 355)
    (Grand Chamber hearing) The applicants complained that on being arrested on suspicion, samples of their DNA had been taken, but despite being released without charge, the samples had retained on the Police database.
    Held: (Unanimous) The . .

Last Update: 30-Sep-15 Ref: 278518

Martin v Watson: HL 14 Jul 1995

References: Times 14-Jul-1995, Gazette 06-Sep-1995, Independent 19-Jul-1995, [1996] AC 74, [1995] 3 WLR 318, [1995] 3 All ER 559
Coram: Lord Keith of Kinkel
Ratio 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.
Ratio Lord Keith said: ‘It is common ground that the ingredients of the tort of malicious prosecution are correctly stated in Clerk & 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.’
Ratio 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.’
This case cites:

  • Cited – Roy -v- Prior HL ([1971] AC 470, [1970] 2 All ER 729)
    The court considered the tort of maliciously procuring an arrest.
    Held: Police officers are given a general immunity against suit, in respect of matters occuring at court, to avoid repeated actions challenging their evidence.
    Lord . .
  • Appeal from – Martin -v- Watson CA (Gazette 23-Mar-94, Times 27-Jan-94, Independent 26-Jan-94, [1994] 2 WLR 500, [1994] QB 425, [1994] 2 All ER 606)
    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] AC 480, [1905] UKHL 1, Bailii, (1905) 13 SLT 340, (1905) 7 F (HL) 109)
    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 . .

(This list may be incomplete)
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Keegan and Others -v- Chief Constable of Merseyside CA (Bailii, [2003] EWCA Civ 936, Times 17-Jul-03, Gazette 11-Sep-03, [2003] 1 WLR 2187)
    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 (Bailii, [2000] EWCA Civ 319)
    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 (Times 14-Jun-00, Gazette 29-Jun-00, Bailii, [2000] EWCA Civ 185, [2000] 1 WLR 2150, [2000] EMLR 873, [2000] Po LR 210, [2000] 2 All ER (Comm) 1, [2000] 4 All ER 41)
    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 (Bailii, [2007] EWHC 2501 (QB))
    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 -v-Strathclyde Joint Police Board and others SCS (ScotC, Bailii, [2003] ScotCS 353)
    . .
  • Cited – Gregory -v- Portsmouth City Council CA (Times 26-Nov-97, Gazette 03-Dec-97, Bailii, [1997] EWCA Civ 2645)
    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 (Bailii, [2008] EWCA Civ 818, Times 27-Aug-08, [2009] QB 407, [2009] 2 WLR 838, [2009] 1 All ER 727, [2009] EMLR 2)
    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 (Bailii, [2009] EWCA Civ 100)
    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 (Bailii, [2009] EWCA Civ 1092, Times)
    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 (Bailii, [2009] EWCA Civ 1215)
    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 (Times 09-Jul-96, [1996] 8 Admin LR 633, Bailii, [1996] EWCA Civ 1311)
    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 (Times 02-Feb-00, Gazette 10-Feb-00, House of Lords, Bailii, [2000] UKHL 3, [2000] 1 AC 419, [2000] 1 All ER 560, [2000] 1 WLR 306, [2000] BLGR 203, [2000] Po LR 3, (2000) 2 LGLR 667)
    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 (Bailii, [2011] EWHC 2836 (QB))
    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 (Bailii, [2014] EWCA Civ 1014)
    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 . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 05-May-16
Ref: 83445