The claimant, a teacher, said he had been unlawfully arrested and detained after an allegation of assault from a pupil. Having attended the police station voluntarily, he said that the circumstances did not satisfy the required precondition that an arrest was necessary. He said that the fact of the arrest would operate against him in his employment.
Held: The arrest was unlawful. ‘The missing element in the trilogy of prerequisites of a lawful arrest is c); that the arresting officer had reasonable grounds for believing that in order to interview the Claimant it was necessary to arrest him. There is simply no evidence as to whether and if so why PC Downie considered it necessary to arrest the Claimant.’
The duties of a custody officer are different from those of the arresting officer, and if his later arrest was lawful, that did not cure the original arrest if unlawful. The claimant had been co-operative and attended two police stations, and the officers had given no evidence to satisfy the court that they had applied the correct criteria, or if the had how it had been met.
The request for an order for destruction of DNA samples and fingerprints was refused, the defendant saying he would properly take the court’s decision into account when considering an application in that behalf.
Slade J
[2011] EWHC 773 (QB), [2011] 2 Cr App Rep 1
Bailii
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 2494), Police Act 1997 113B
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Holgate-Mohammed v Duke HL 1984
A police officer had purported to arrest the plaintiff under the 1967 Act, suspecting her of theft. After interview she was released several hours later without charge. She sought damages alleging wrongful arrest. The judge had found that he had . .
Cited – Alexander, Farrelly and Others, Re Judicial Review QBNI 5-Mar-2009
Each claimant said that they had been wrongfully arrested, the arresting police officers having either failed to ask whether the arrest was necessary (Farrelly), or mistakenly concluding so.
Held: The Order now contained in regulation . .
Cited – C, Regina (on the Application of) v ‘A’ Magistrates’ Court Admn 26-Sep-2006
Complaint was made about the slipshod completion of applications for search warrants. The nature of the review of compliance with Section 24(4) was to be that appropriate to Section 24(6). Underhill J held: ’26. The terms of s-s. (5) are new and . .
Cited – Castorina v Chief Constable of Surrey CA 10-Jun-1988
Whether an officer had reasonable cause to arrest somebody without a warrant depended upon an objective assessment of the information available to him, and not upon his subjective beliefs. The court had three questions to ask (per Woolf LJ): ‘(a) . .
Cited – Lewis and Evans v The Chief Constable of the South Wales Constabulary CA 11-Oct-1990
The plaintiffs said that their arrests had been unlawful.
Held: The arrests were lawful because, whilst their initial arrests were unlawful because the appellants were not told the reasons for them, they became lawful when they were given the . .
Cited – Al-Fayed and others v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and others CA 25-Nov-2004
The appellants appealed from dismissal of their claims for wrongful imprisonment by the respondent. Each had attended at a police station for interview on allegations of theft. They had been arrested and held pending interview and then released. Mr . .
Cited – Cumming and others v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police CA 17-Dec-2003
The six claimants sought damages for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment. Each had been arrested on an officer’s suspicion. They operated CCTV equipment, and it appeared that tapes showing the commission of an offence had been tampered with. Each . .
Cited – Plange v Chief Constable for Humberside Police CA 23-Mar-1992
Where an arresting officer knows at the time of arrest that no charge is possible, the arresting officer acts unlawfully. However, it is for the claimant to establish on Wednesbury principles that the decision to arrest in any particular case was . .
Cited – Thompson v Commissioner of Police of Metropolis; Hsu v Same CA 20-Feb-1997
CS Damages of 200,000 pounds by way of exemplary damages had been awarded against the police for unlawful arrest and assault.
Held: The court gave a guideline maximum pounds 50,000 award against police for . .
Cited – Wilding v Chief Constable of Lancashire CA 22-May-1995
The court considered a claim by a woman for wrongful arrest and unlawful detention by police officers who had reasonably suspected her of burglary of the house of her former partner. In interview by the police, she denied the offence and made . .
Cited by:
Distinguished – Hayes v Merseyside Police CA 29-Jul-2011
The claimant had been arrested after a complaint of harassment. The officer then contacted the complainant who then withdrew his complaint. The officer went to visit the complainant to discuss it further. On his return the claimant was released from . .
Cited – Lord Hanningfield of Chelmsford v Chief Constable of Essex Police QBD 15-Feb-2013
The claimant sought damages alleging unlawful arrest and search and detention. He had served a term of imprisonment for having made false expenses claims to the House of Lords. This raid occurred on his release. The arrest was planned and made to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Torts – Other, Police
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.431296
