AB v A Chief Constable (Rev 1)

AB v A Chief Constable (Rev 1)

Although the Chief Constable was under a public law duty of honesty and integrity to provide a full and frank reference to the Regulatory Body, in the special circumstances of this case, sending the second reference would be unfair, breach the Data Protection Act 1998, and undermine the claimant's legitimate expectation arising from the Force's policy and specific undertaking to provide only a standard reference. Therefore, the Chief Constable cannot send the second reference.

Parties
Claimant: AB; Defendant: A Chief Constable
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 June 2014
Procedural Posture
Judgment / Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed. Injunction granted.
Legal Topics
Employment References, Police Disciplinary Proceedings, Legitimate Expectation, Data Protection Act Compliance, Public Law Duties of Honesty and Integrity
Employment Law Public Law Data Protection Employment References Police Disciplinary Proceedings Legitimate Expectation Data Protection Act Compliance Public Law Duties of Honesty and Integrity

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AB

Claimant

A Chief Constable

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judgment / Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Chief Constable was under a legal duty to send a second, more detailed reference disclosing disciplinary and sickness information to the Regulatory Body
  2. 2 Whether sending the second reference would breach the Data Protection Act 1998
  3. 3 Whether sending the second reference would violate the claimant's legitimate expectation

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Chief Constable was under a public law duty of honesty and integrity to provide a full and frank reference to the Regulatory Body, in the special circumstances of this case, sending the second reference would be unfair, breach the Data Protection Act 1998, and undermine the claimant's legitimate expectation arising from the Force's policy and specific undertaking to provide only a standard reference. Therefore, the Chief Constable cannot send the second reference.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed. Injunction granted.

Orders

  • The Chief Constable is restrained from sending the second reference disclosing the claimant's disciplinary and sickness information to the Regulatory Body.