R, R (On the Application Of) v The National Police Chief's Council & Anor [2017] EWHC 2586 (Admin) (17 October 2017)

R, R (On the Application Of) v The National Police Chief's Council & Anor [2017] EWHC 2586 (Admin) (17 October 2017)

The decision to refuse the claimant employment based solely on a childhood reprimand for low-level theft was unlawful and in breach of Article 8 ECHR. The policy and legislative regime requiring disclosure and use of such reprimands for police employment is not 'in accordance with the law' nor 'necessary in a democratic society', as it lacks sufficient calibration, proportionality, and independent review, and fails to distinguish between relevant factors.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 2586 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: The Queen (on the application of "R"); First Defendant: The National Police Chief's Council; Second Defendant: The Secretary of State for Justice; Interested Party: College of Policing; Interested Party: National DNA Database Strategy Board; Interested Party: Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed
Legal Topics
Article 8 ECHR, Disclosure of Criminal Records, Police Vetting, Rehabilitation of Offenders, Data Retention, Proportionality, Legality of Legislative Schemes
Human Rights Law Administrative Law Employment Law Article 8 ECHR Disclosure of Criminal Records Police Vetting Rehabilitation of Offenders Data Retention +2 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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen (on the application of "R")

Claimant

The National Police Chief's Council

First Defendant

The Secretary of State for Justice

Second Defendant

College of Policing

Interested Party

National DNA Database Strategy Board

Interested Party

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the disclosure and use of a childhood reprimand for theft in police employment vetting violates Article 8 ECHR
  2. 2 Whether the legislative and policy framework for disclosure and use of such records is 'in accordance with the law' and 'necessary in a democratic society' under Article 8(2) ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The decision to refuse the claimant employment based solely on a childhood reprimand for low-level theft was unlawful and in breach of Article 8 ECHR. The policy and legislative regime requiring disclosure and use of such reprimands for police employment is not 'in accordance with the law' nor 'necessary in a democratic society', as it lacks sufficient calibration, proportionality, and independent review, and fails to distinguish between relevant factors.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed

Orders

  • Declaration that the decision to refuse employment was unlawful and in breach of Article 8 ECHR
  • Declaration that the policy relied upon by the police is in violation of Article 8 ECHR