2000
|
|
Cases Reported |
| Talbot v DPP | 1 |
| Issue: Whether an office in a building is an enclosed area within the meaning of the Vagrancy Act 1824 | |
| Gregory v Portsmouth City Council | 3 |
| Issue: Whether a malicious prosecution claim can be brought in respect of disciplinary proceedings | |
| Fitt v UK | 10 |
| Issue: Whether Art 6 of the Convention was breached by reason of non-disclosure of material in the hands of the prosecution | |
| Jasper v UK | 25 |
| Issue: Whether Art 6 of the Convention was breached by reason of non-disclosure of material in the hands of the prosecution | |
| Rowe and Davis v UK | 41 |
| Issue: Whether Art 6 of the Convention was breached by reason of non-disclosure of material in the hands of the prosecution | |
| Chief Constable of Nottinghamshire Constabulary v Parkin | 54 |
| Issue: Whether Justices ought to have declined jurisdiction to entertain proceedings under the Police Property Act 1897 when a difficult factual issue arose | |
| Conlon v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police | 58 |
| Issue: Whether the Judge had been right to order summary judgment on a false imprisonment claim; whether a split trial should be ordered, with liability and availability of aggravated and/or exemplary damages determined by the Jury and quantum assessed by the Judge | |
| Gloster v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police | 61 |
| Issue: Whether a police officer who was bitten by a police dog should succeed in a claim in negligence and under the Animals Act 1971 | |
| R (Lainton) v Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester Police | 67 |
| Issue: Whether an Assistant Chief Constable was entitled to extend a probationer’s period of probation after its expiry | |
| Whitmarsh v Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset Constabulary | 73 |
| Issue: Whether the Judge should have ordered disclosure of informant-related documentation in the course of a trial | |
| R (Stewart) v Sussex Police Authority | 76 |
| Issue: Whether an officer who was capable of carrying out sedentary duties should have been required either to rejoin the force or to lose her pension entitlement | |
| Clarke v Chief Constable of North Wales Police | 83 |
| Issue: Whether an informant-based drugs arrest was lawful and whether telling a person that she was under arrest “on suspicion of controlled drugs” complied with s28(3) of PACE | |
| Rixon and another v Chief Constable of Kent | 91 |
| Issue: Whether a solicitor who had been refused access to a police station could succeed in a claim in negligence and/or misfeasance | |
| B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset | 98 |
| Issue: Whether an application for a sex offender order was civil or criminal; the appropriate standard of proof; whether an order could be amended | |
| Bibby v Chief Constable of Essex | 107 |
| Issue: Whether an arrest of a bailiff for breach of the peace was lawful | |
| Robinson v Commissioners of Customs and Excise | 112 |
| Issue: Whether an informant could sue for breach of contract based on an agreement for the supply of information in return for remuneration | |
| McNern v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis | 117 |
| Issue: Whether it was reasonably foreseeable that an arrest would cause psychiatric damage | |
| Dhesi v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police | 120 |
| Issue: Whether an arrest for affray was lawful when it came some time after the conduct relied upon, the grounds for arrest were given by a different officer from the arresting officer and the claimant was just told he was being arrested “for affray” | |
| Kuopila v Finland | 125 |
| Issue: Whether Art 6 European Convention was breached by non-disclosure of a police report | |
| R (Bennion) v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police | 131 |
| Issue: Whether a Chief Constable could hear disciplinary charges where he was a party to Employment Tribunal proceedings against the officer | |
| Condron v UK | 139 |
| Issue: Whether Art 6 was breached by an inadequate direction by the trial judge as to the drawing of adverse inferences from silence in police interviews in light of legal advice to remain silent, and the limited scope of the Appeal Court inquiry into the fairness of the trial | |
| R (Stunt) v Mallet | 152 |
| Issue: Whether a depressive illness had been sustained in the execution of an officer’s duties for the purposes of the Police Pensions Regulations 1987 | |
| Khan v UK | 156 |
| Issue: Whether the use of covert listening equipment to record a suspect’s conversations whilst in his home was a breach of Art 8 | |
| Ghafar v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police | 165 |
| Issue: Whether an officer making an arrest under s25 PACE is required by s28(3) PACE to give the offence concerned or the general arrest condition or both; whether s28 had been complied with in the circumstances | |
| Lee v UK | 170 |
| Issue: Whether police disciplinary proceedings engage Art 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights | |
| R (Manning and another) v DPP | 172 |
| Issue: Whether the DPP was obliged to give reasons for his decision not to prosecute a prison officer for the manslaughter of an inmate; whether the decision was proper | |
| R (Coombs) v Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester Police | 182 |
| Issue: Whether the police were entitled to retain information about a person after he had been acquitted | |
| Magee v UK | 188 |
| Issue: Whether Art 6 European Convention was breached by the refusal of access to a lawyer for 48 hours, during which the defendant confessed | |
| Averill v UK | 198 |
| Issue: Whether there were breaches of Art 6 European Convention from the drawing of adverse inferences from a defendant’s silence in police interviews and from the refusal of access to a lawyer for the first 24 hours of his detention | |
| Mahon & Kent v Rahn and Others | 210 |
| Issue: Whether a complainant was liable in libel and/or malicious prosecution in respect of criminal charges brought by a prosecuting authority | |
| R (Service Authority for the National Crime Squad and others) v Customs & Excise Commissioners | 246 |
| Issue: Whether the National Crime Squad and the National Criminal Intelligence Service are police authorities and entitled to a VAT refund | |
| Cunningham v Essex County Council and others | 254 |
| Issue: Whether the Council was liable for malicious prosecution when the police had laid charges on the basis of its complaints | |
| R (GR) v Greater Manchester Police | 272 |
| Issue: Whether a failure to inform a person about the registration effects of the Sex Offenders Act 1997 rendered a subsequent caution invalid | |
| R (Thompson) v Chief Constable of Northumbria Constabulary | 277 |
| Issue: Whether a decision to refuse a suspended police officer who was acting as a solicitor’s representative access to a police station was lawful | |
| Donnelly v Chief Constable of Lincolnshire and others | 284 |
| Issue: Whether a Chief Constable could be liable for breaches of contract by subordinate officers in his force | |
| R v Governor of Brockhill Prison ex p Evans (No 2) | 290 |
| Issue: Whether damages for false imprisonment were payable to a prisoner whose release date had been calculated on the basis of judicial decisions which were overruled | |
| Darker and others v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police | 305 |
| Issue: Whether a claim in misfeasance in which it was alleged that a police officer had fabricated evidence should be struck out on immunity grounds | |
| Waters v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis | 322 |
| Issue: Whether a chief officer owed his officers a duty of care to investigate complaints about bullying and to prevent such bullying | |
| Heaven v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police | 330 |
| Issue: Whether a jury’s verdicts were irrational; whether there should be a retrial on account of Counsel’s behaviour before the jury and the admission of prejudicial evidence | |
| R (Booth) v South Yorkshire Police Authority | 335 |
| Issue: Whether there was power to require a police authority to pay the costs incurred by a junior officer in disciplinary proceedings | |
| R v Sanghera | 337 |
| Issue: Whether Code B applied to searches of a victim’s premises which were carried out with the occupier’s consent | |
| Spence v British Railways Board | 341 |
| Issue: Whether the British Transport Police are a constabulary maintained by an enactment and so outside the remit of unfair dismissal proceedings | |
| R (TDT) v Dyfed Powys Police Public Protection Group | 346 |
| Issue: Whether a public protection meeting to decide if there should be disclosure of the fact that allegations of child sex abuse had been made against a person had been conducted fairly | |
| R (A) v Chief Constables of C and D | 353 |
| Issue: Whether the disclosure by police officers to an employer of unproven allegations of indecent assault contravened the Data Protection Acts and Art 8 European Convention on Human Rights | |
| Murgatroyd v Chief Constable for West Yorkshire Police | 363 |
| Issue: Whether it had been lawful to send a police dog into a house when the occupier had refused to open the door. | |
| Wilson v Chief Constable of Lancashire Constabulary | 367 |
| Issue: Whether informing a suspect that he was under arrest “for theft” complied with s28(3) of PACE | |
| Abraham v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis | 374 |
| Issue: Whether it was an abuse to contend that an arrest for a particular offence was unlawful when the claimant had subsequently accepted a caution for that offence | |
| Nabina v Chief Constable for Greater Manchester and others | 377 |
| Issue: Whether pre-action discovery should be given for a proposed malicious prosecution claim where any damages recovered would be nominal | |
| Sinclair v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire and British Telecom PLC | 380 |
| Issue: Whether a Judge had been correct to refuse to grant summary judgment in the defendant’s favour on a malicious prosecution claim on the basis that it was clearly arguable that the defendant was aware that summaries of the evidence were unfair | |
| Attorney-General’s Reference No 3 of 1999 | 386 |
| Issue: Whether s64 of PACE precludes the use in evidence of a DNA sample that ought to have been destroyed | |
| Safeway PLC v Tate | 395 |
| Issue: Whether it had been appropriate to order summary judgment in a case that was to be tried with a jury | |
| R (East Riding of Yorkshire Council) v The Joint Committee for the purpose of making appointments to the Humberside Police Authority | 401 |
| Issue: Whether a Joint Committee, in making appointments to a Police Authority, is required to take into account Independent councillors | |
View as
Sort by
Display
per page
