Segalov, R (on the application of) v Chief Constable of Sussex Police & Anor [2018] EWHC 3187 (Admin) (23 November 2018)

Segalov, R (on the application of) v Chief Constable of Sussex Police & Anor [2018] EWHC 3187 (Admin) (23 November 2018)

The refusal of accreditation by Sussex Police was unlawful due to the absence of an operative, published policy and the denial of procedural fairness, as the claimant was not informed of the reasons for refusal nor given an opportunity to make representations. The claim against GMP failed as it did not make the substantive decision. The process breached public law principles and, to that extent, the first data protection principle.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 3187 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Michael Segalov; 1st Defendant: The Chief Constable of Sussex Police; 2nd Defendant: The Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim against GMP dismissed; claim against Sussex Police succeeds to the extent of a declaration and quashing of the decision.
Legal Topics
Procedural Fairness, Unpublished Policy, Accreditation Refusal, Article 8 ECHR, Data Protection Act 1998
Public Law Human Rights Law Data Protection Law Procedural Fairness Unpublished Policy Accreditation Refusal Article 8 ECHR Data Protection Act 1998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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Segalov

Claimant

The Chief Constable of Sussex Police

1st Defendant

The Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal of accreditation was procedurally unfair
  2. 2 Whether the decision was made on the basis of an unpublished or inapplicable policy
  3. 3 Whether the correct legal test was applied in refusing accreditation

Ratio Decidendi

The refusal of accreditation by Sussex Police was unlawful due to the absence of an operative, published policy and the denial of procedural fairness, as the claimant was not informed of the reasons for refusal nor given an opportunity to make representations. The claim against GMP failed as it did not make the substantive decision. The process breached public law principles and, to that extent, the first data protection principle.

Court Disposition

Claim against GMP dismissed; claim against Sussex Police succeeds to the extent of a declaration and quashing of the decision.

Orders

  • Declaration that the process by which accreditation was refused was unlawful (against Sussex Police)
  • Quashing of the decision to refuse accreditation (against Sussex Police)