header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
23 September 2022 / Veronica Cowan
Issue: 7995 / Categories: Features , Profession , Criminal , Regulatory , Disciplinary&grievance procedures
printer mail-detail

Policing the police

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
Veronica Cowan reports on a case which is creating uncertainty in police serious misconduct cases
  • Reports on impact of Eckland v Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset.
  • Asks if Legally Qualified Chairs, who hear serious misconduct cases in the police, should have immunity from suit.

As of late I have taken to reading Lynda La Plante crime novels, and if real police officers indulge in some of the antics her fictional ones do, we really should be worried.

But they will, at least, be held to account, and in the UK that is done by Legally Qualified Chairs and Independent Panel Members (LQCs and IPMs), who are appointed by Police and Crime Commissioners, to serve on police misconduct hearing panels. When police authorities chaired these panels, the process was perceived as the police judging the police. This is an important constitutional step, and the stakes are high, because a police officer accused of gross misconduct is at risk of dismissal. To sit on a panel, individuals must satisfy the judicial-appointment

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

Read All
NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Firm welcomes partner with specialist expertise in family and art law

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Dual-qualified partner joins international private client team

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Driving test fraudsters steer towards jail
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
NLJ this week: Deepfakes demand data law muscle
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
NLJ this week: 40% penalty for coercive control
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
NLJ this week: Mbappé row spotlights ‘ethics bonuses’
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
NLJ this week: Appeal court reins in ‘wrong defendant’ switcheroo

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll