header-logo header-logo

23 May 2014
Issue: 7608 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

London riots: liability is strict

Three video firms whose stock was looted or destroyed during the 2011 London riots have won £3m compensation from the Mayor’s office.

The Court of Appeal found that consequential loss was in principle recoverable and held the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime liable under the Riot (Damages) Act 1886 for damage to stock held at a Sony warehouse in Enfield.

Under s 2(1) of the 1886 Act, the police are obliged to pay compensation out of a police fund to any person who suffers loss “where a house, shop, or building in a police area has been injured or destroyed, or the property therein has been injured, stolen, or destroyed, by any persons riotously and tumultuously assembled together”. The Court of Appeal upheld the high court’s finding that liability is strict.

Delivering his judgment, Lord Justice Moore-Bick, Master of the Rolls, said: “Strictly speaking, all that matters for the purposes of the Act is whether the group which attacked the warehouse was riotously and tumultuously assembled at the time they caused the damage.”

Lawrence Abramson, consultant solicitor at Keystone Law, who represented the three video firms, says: “The Riot Act states that the police must compensate businesses for damage caused during riots and so most insurance policies do not include provisions for this type of loss.

My clients desperately need to recover the losses they have incurred as a result of the events in 2011 so I am pleased that Court of Appeal has upheld its decision and that they will receive the compensation they need.”

 

Issue: 7608 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Firm awards training contracts to paralegals through internal programme

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Private client disputes specialist joins commercial litigation team

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Cumbria firm appoints new head of residential property

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Family law must shift from conflict-driven litigation to child-centred problem-solving, according to a major new report. Writing in NLJ this week, Caroline Bowden of Anthony Gold outlines findings showing overwhelming support for reform, with 92% agreeing lawyers owe duties to children as well as clients
back-to-top-scroll