header-logo header-logo

08 June 2018 / Dijen Basu KC
Issue: 7796 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Civil actions against the police

nlj_7796_basu

Dijen Basu QC looks at the broadening scope of claims against the police

  • The scope of claims which may be brought against police has widened.
  • The Supreme Court has clarified the duty of care owed by police for positive acts in operational situations.

Time was when it was considered by practitioners that, for reasons of public policy, save in exceptional circumstances, the police owed no duty of care to victims, witnesses or others in relation to operational policing, so that claims could not be brought for damages for ‘operational negligence’ (see, eg Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [1989] AC 53, (a claim brought by the mother of a victim of the ‘Yorkshire Ripper’ who would not have been murdered, had he been apprehended sooner) and Brooks v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2005] 1 WLR 1495, (a claim brought by Duwayne Brooks, the teenager with Stephen Lawrence when he was murdered 25 years ago)).

The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) (and the Human Rights

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Should a conviction stand when a later ruling reveals that the law underpinning it was wrong? The answer exposes a clash between finality and justice
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
back-to-top-scroll