Ogle v Thames Valley Police [2001] EWCA Civ 598 (6 April 2001)

Ogle v Thames Valley Police [2001] EWCA Civ 598 (6 April 2001)

The claim under section 22(1) of the Data Protection Act 1984 cannot proceed because the applicant has already been compensated for all damage, including distress, arising from the wrongful arrest and false imprisonment, and there is no distinct or additional distress attributable solely to the data inaccuracy. Allowing the claim to proceed would be an abuse of process.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 598
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Ronald Ogle; Defendant/respondent: The Chief Constable of the Thames Valley Police
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 April 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Second Tier Appeal From Queen's Bench Division, Appeal Against Order Striking Out Action
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Concurrent Tortfeasors, Damages for Distress, Data Protection Act 1984 S.22(1), False Imprisonment, Wrongful Arrest
Civil Procedure Tort Law Data Protection Abuse of Process Concurrent Tortfeasors Damages for Distress Data Protection Act 1984 S.22(1) False Imprisonment +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ronald Ogle

Claimant/applicant

The Chief Constable of the Thames Valley Police

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Second Tier Appeal From Queen's Bench Division, Appeal Against Order Striking Out Action

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a claim under section 22(1) of the Data Protection Act 1984 can proceed after settlement of a claim for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment arising from the same facts
  2. 2 Whether the damages for distress under the Data Protection Act are distinct from those already compensated in the prior settlement
  3. 3 Whether allowing the claim to proceed would constitute an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The claim under section 22(1) of the Data Protection Act 1984 cannot proceed because the applicant has already been compensated for all damage, including distress, arising from the wrongful arrest and false imprisonment, and there is no distinct or additional distress attributable solely to the data inaccuracy. Allowing the claim to proceed would be an abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs