Essex Police v Transport Arendonk BVBA [2020] EWHC 212 (QB) (23 January 2020)

Essex Police v Transport Arendonk BVBA [2020] EWHC 212 (QB) (23 January 2020)

It is not clear beyond argument that a duty of care is excluded by authority or by the application of established principles to the facts. The case is not purely an omission or act case and shares features of both. Whether the police owed a duty of care or assumed responsibility for the lorry's security cannot be determined without findings of fact at trial. The claim is not suitable for strike-out at this stage.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 212 (QB)
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 / Appeal Against Refusal to Strike Out Claim
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Duty of Care, Assumption of Responsibility, Liability for Acts of Third Parties, Public Authority Liability
Tort Law Police Liability Negligence Duty of Care Assumption of Responsibility Liability for Acts of Third Parties Public Authority 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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Chief Constable of Essex Police

Claimant/appellant

Transport Arendonk BVBA

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Strike Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the police owed a duty of care to the respondent for property left unattended after arrest of the driver
  2. 2 Whether the police assumed responsibility for the security of the lorry and its contents
  3. 3 Whether the claim should be struck out as having no real prospect of success

Ratio Decidendi

It is not clear beyond argument that a duty of care is excluded by authority or by the application of established principles to the facts. The case is not purely an omission or act case and shares features of both. Whether the police owed a duty of care or assumed responsibility for the lorry's security cannot be determined without findings of fact at trial. The claim is not suitable for strike-out at this stage.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed; the claim is not struck out and may proceed to trial.