Marzieh Ansari v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis & Ors

Marzieh Ansari v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis & Ors

The Master erred in law by striking out certain claims without allowing the Claimant an opportunity to properly plead claims for assault, battery, and unlawful retention of property, which were apparent from the statements of case and could potentially disclose reasonable grounds if properly pleaded. However, the Master was correct to strike out other claims, including those based on alleged breaches of Articles 3 and 4 ECHR and negligence in failing to investigate or refer for modern slavery, as these were not properly pleaded or sustainable on the facts alleged.

Parties
Appellant/claimant: Marzieh Ansari; First Respondent/defendant: Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis; Second Respondent/defendant: Crown Prosecution Service; Third Respondent/defendant: Chief Constable of Sussex Police
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / High Court Appeal From Order Striking Out Claims
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; opportunity to replead specified claims granted; other claims remain struck out.
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Wrongful Arrest, Assault and Battery, Negligence, Article 3 ECHR, Article 4 ECHR, Article 8 ECHR, Retention of Property, Modern Slavery, Police Powers
Civil Procedure Tort Law Human Rights Strike Out Applications Wrongful Arrest Assault and Battery Negligence Article 3 ECHR +5 more

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 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marzieh Ansari

Appellant/claimant

Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis

First Respondent/defendant

Crown Prosecution Service

Second Respondent/defendant

Chief Constable of Sussex Police

Third Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / High Court Appeal From Order Striking Out Claims

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Master erred in law in striking out the Claimant's claims without allowing amendment or repleading
  2. 2 Whether the Claimant's statements of case disclosed reasonable grounds for bringing the claims indicated
  3. 3 Whether procedural fairness required further opportunity to amend

Ratio Decidendi

The Master erred in law by striking out certain claims without allowing the Claimant an opportunity to properly plead claims for assault, battery, and unlawful retention of property, which were apparent from the statements of case and could potentially disclose reasonable grounds if properly pleaded. However, the Master was correct to strike out other claims, including those based on alleged breaches of Articles 3 and 4 ECHR and negligence in failing to investigate or refer for modern slavery, as these were not properly pleaded or sustainable on the facts alleged.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; opportunity to replead specified claims granted; other claims remain struck out.

Orders

  • Claimant to file and serve re-amended Claim Form and substituted Re-Amended Particulars of Claim limited to claims for assault, battery, and unlawful retention of property as specified in the judgment, within a specified period (6-8 weeks).
  • Claims to be transferred to the County Court.