Essex Police v Transport Arendonk BVBA

Essex Police v Transport Arendonk BVBA

It is not clear beyond argument that a duty of care is excluded by authority or principle; the claim raises arguable issues of duty and assumption of responsibility that require trial for resolution. The appeal against refusal to strike out the claim is dismissed.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: The Chief Constable of Essex Police; Defendant/respondent: Transport Arendonk BVBA
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Refusal to Strike Out Claim
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Duty of Care, Negligence, Assumption of Responsibility, Liability for Acts of Third Parties, Police Liability
Tort Law Public Authority Liability Duty of Care Negligence Assumption of Responsibility Liability for Acts of Third Parties Police Liability

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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Chief Constable of Essex Police

Claimant/appellant

Transport Arendonk BVBA

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Refusal to Strike Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether police owe a duty of care to secure a vehicle and its contents after arresting its driver
  2. 2 Whether police assumed responsibility for the security of the lorry and its contents
  3. 3 Whether the claim for breach of statutory duty under s.56(1) of PACE is viable

Ratio Decidendi

It is not clear beyond argument that a duty of care is excluded by authority or principle; the claim raises arguable issues of duty and assumption of responsibility that require trial for resolution. The appeal against refusal to strike out the claim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The claim is not struck out and may proceed to trial