Desmond Campbell v PC Craig & Ors

Desmond Campbell v PC Craig & Ors

Both the Hammond and Hopkins claims are abusive of the process of the court as they are duplicative of previous or ongoing proceedings, could and should have been brought in earlier litigation, and amount to unjustified harassment of the defendants. The claimant's persistent conduct of issuing meritless and repetitive claims and applications justifies the imposition of a General Civil Restraint Order for three years.

Parties
Claimant: Desmond Campbell; First Defendant: PC Craig; Second Defendant: PC Luke Hammond; Third Defendant: PC Rachel Hopkins; Fourth Defendant: The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Strike Out Applications and Application for General Civil Restraint Order
Outcome
Claims struck out as abuse of process; General Civil Restraint Order granted for three years
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Res Judicata, Civil Restraint Orders, Trespass, Assault, False Imprisonment
Civil Procedure Tort Law Human Rights Abuse of Process Res Judicata Civil Restraint Orders Trespass Assault +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 2 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Desmond Campbell

Claimant

PC Craig

First Defendant

PC Luke Hammond

Second Defendant

PC Rachel Hopkins

Third Defendant

The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Ruling on Strike Out Applications and Application for General Civil Restraint Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Hammond and Hopkins claims amount to an abuse of process and should be struck out
  2. 2 Whether the claimant's conduct warrants the imposition of a General Civil Restraint Order

Ratio Decidendi

Both the Hammond and Hopkins claims are abusive of the process of the court as they are duplicative of previous or ongoing proceedings, could and should have been brought in earlier litigation, and amount to unjustified harassment of the defendants. The claimant's persistent conduct of issuing meritless and repetitive claims and applications justifies the imposition of a General Civil Restraint Order for three years.

Court Disposition

Claims struck out as abuse of process; General Civil Restraint Order granted for three years

Orders

  • Claims in KB-2024-003683 and KB-2024-003687 struck out
  • General Civil Restraint Order imposed on claimant for three years from 24 July 2025