CLG & Ors v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police [2015] EWCA Civ 836 (28 July 2015)

CLG & Ors v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police [2015] EWCA Civ 836 (28 July 2015)

The police did not owe a duty of care to the appellants in the circumstances, as their actions fell within core police functions protected by public policy immunity; witness immunity applied to the transmission of the statement; there was no breach of Article 8 ECHR or the Data Protection Act 1998 as appropriate systems were in place and statutory exemptions applied.

Citation
[2015] EWCA Civ 836
Parties
Claimant/appellant: CLG; Claimant/appellant: AJD; Claimant/appellant: JAD; Defendant/respondent: Chief Constable of Merseyside Police
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 July 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Police Liability, Negligence, Witness Immunity, Article 8 ECHR, Data Protection Act 1998
Tort Law Human Rights Law Data Protection Law Police Liability Negligence Witness Immunity Article 8 ECHR Data Protection Act 1998

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 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CLG

Claimant/appellant

AJD

Claimant/appellant

JAD

Claimant/appellant

Chief Constable of Merseyside Police

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the police owed a duty of care to the appellants in respect of the disclosure of their address
  2. 2 Whether the police were immune from suit due to witness immunity
  3. 3 Whether there was a breach of Article 8 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The police did not owe a duty of care to the appellants in the circumstances, as their actions fell within core police functions protected by public policy immunity; witness immunity applied to the transmission of the statement; there was no breach of Article 8 ECHR or the Data Protection Act 1998 as appropriate systems were in place and statutory exemptions applied.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed