Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis v A Police Conduct Panel

Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis v A Police Conduct Panel

The sanctions decision was unlawful because the Panel considered testimonial evidence at the stage of assessing seriousness, contrary to binding guidance. The sanction against PS Russell was also irrational as no reasonable tribunal, correctly applying the law, could have imposed a final written warning for proven dishonesty of this nature. The sanctions decision must be quashed and remitted to a newly constituted Panel for redetermination.

Parties
Claimant: Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis; Defendant: A Police Conduct Panel; Interested Party: PS Hayley Russell; Interested Party: PC Christopher Strickland
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 November 2022
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment on the Merits After Full Hearing
Outcome
Sanctions decision quashed; matter remitted to a new Panel for redetermination.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Police Misconduct, Disciplinary Proceedings, Sanctions, Procedural Fairness, Wednesbury Unreasonableness
Administrative Law Police Law Employment Law Judicial Review Police Misconduct Disciplinary Proceedings Sanctions Procedural Fairness +1 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 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis

Claimant

A Police Conduct Panel

Defendant

PS Hayley Russell

Interested Party

PC Christopher Strickland

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment on the Merits After Full Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the process by which the Police Conduct Panel reached its sanctions decision was unlawful
  2. 2 Whether the sanction imposed on PS Russell was irrational (Wednesbury unreasonable)

Ratio Decidendi

The sanctions decision was unlawful because the Panel considered testimonial evidence at the stage of assessing seriousness, contrary to binding guidance. The sanction against PS Russell was also irrational as no reasonable tribunal, correctly applying the law, could have imposed a final written warning for proven dishonesty of this nature. The sanctions decision must be quashed and remitted to a newly constituted Panel for redetermination.

Court Disposition

Sanctions decision quashed; matter remitted to a new Panel for redetermination.

Orders

  • The sanctions decision of the Police Conduct Panel is quashed.
  • The matter is remitted to a newly constituted Panel for redetermination of sanctions against both officers.