Roberts v The Attorney General & Anor

Roberts v The Attorney General & Anor

The court found that the lower court erred in assuming HMIC's statements were made pursuant to a statutory direction without evidential basis. If HMIC acted outside the scope of any statutory direction, the principles excluding a duty of care may not apply. The appeal was allowed and the strike out order set aside to permit determination of duty of care at trial based on actual evidence.

Parties
Claimant: Howard Gray Roberts; 1st Defendant: The Attorney General; 2nd Defendant: Kate Flannery
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Against Order Striking Out Claim
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Negligent Misstatement, Duty of Care, Statutory Functions, Police Appointments
Tort Law Administrative Law Negligent Misstatement Duty of Care Statutory Functions Police Appointments

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Howard Gray Roberts

Claimant

The Attorney General

1st Defendant

Kate Flannery

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Against Order Striking Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether HMIC owed a duty of care to the claimant in making statements to the selection panel
  2. 2 Whether statements made by HMIC were within the scope of statutory functions
  3. 3 Whether imposition of a duty of care conflicts with statutory purpose

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the lower court erred in assuming HMIC's statements were made pursuant to a statutory direction without evidential basis. If HMIC acted outside the scope of any statutory direction, the principles excluding a duty of care may not apply. The appeal was allowed and the strike out order set aside to permit determination of duty of care at trial based on actual evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order striking out the claim set aside
  • Claim remitted for trial to determine duty of care and breach