The plaintiff said that the defendant’s allegation against him leading to a prosecution which failed was malicious.
Held: Lord Goddard CJ said: ‘It is quite easy to imagine a case in which a person was thoroughly justified in bringing proceedings, and then in the course of the case something comes to light which shows the prosecution to be in fact groundless. Then if the prosecutor insists on continuing the prosecution without at any rate informing the court of the facts which he has since discovered, he will, I think, possibly have no reasonable or probable cause for continuing the prosecution and at any rate will be guilty of malice.’
Lord Goddard considered the decision in Christie v Leachinsky and said of it: ‘I do not think that the decision of the House of Lords means that if an officer is arresting a deaf person, he has to possess himself of an ear-trumpet, or something of that sort, or shout at the top of his voice. He must do what a reasonable person would do in the circumstances. As I said during the course of the argument, if a police officer who is not able to speak French has to arrest a Frenchman who does not speak English, he can only tell him in English for what he is arresting him, and take him to the police station until some officer who does speak the language or some interpreter comes to explain the charge on which he has been arrested to the person arrested. In stating the charge or on suspicion of what crime a person is arrested, the person arresting without warrant has only to act reasonably.’
Judges:
Lord Goddard CJ
Citations:
[1951] 2 KB 459
Citing:
Cited – Christie v Leachinsky HL 25-Mar-1947
Arrested Person must be told basis of the Arrest
Police officers appealed against a finding of false imprisonment. The plaintiff had been arrested under the 1921 Act, but this provided no power of arrest (which the appellant knew). The officers might lawfully have arrested the plaintiff for the . .
Cited by:
Cited – Howarth v Gwent Constabulary and Another QBD 1-Nov-2011
The claimant alleged malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office against the defendant. He had been charged with perverting the course of justice. He had worked for a firm of solicitors specialising in defending road traffic prosecutions. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Torts – Other
Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.448398