Larrier v Merseyside Police

The judge erred in law by not leaving the central factual issue—whether the claimant was speeding—to the jury, as there was a clear conflict of evidence. The justification for the police's actions depended on this factual determination, and it was not for the judge alone to resolve it. The appeal was allowed and a new trial ordered.

Parties: Claimant/appellant: Kensley Larrier; Defendant/respondent: Chief Constable of Merseyside Police
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 25 February 2004
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order of Liverpool County Court
Outcome: Appeal allowed; new trial ordered
Legal Topics: False Imprisonment, Malicious Prosecution, Reasonable and Probable Cause, Jury Trials, Police Powers

Tort Law Criminal Law Civil Procedure False Imprisonment Malicious Prosecution Reasonable and Probable Cause Jury Trials Police Powers

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 7 Party arguments 2

Parties

Kensley Larrier

Claimant/appellant

Chief Constable of Merseyside Police

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Judgment and Order of Liverpool County Court

Legal Issues

1 Whether the judge erred in law in withholding from the jury, and himself deciding, the issue of whether the claimant was in fact speeding
2 Whether there was reasonable and probable cause for the claimant's arrest and prosecution
3 Whether the claimant was falsely imprisoned and maliciously prosecuted

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; new trial ordered

Orders

Order of 7th October 2003 set aside
Claims for damages for false imprisonment and malicious prosecution remitted to county court for retrial or rehearing