Zenati v Police of the Metropolis & Anor [2015] EWCA Civ 80 (11 February 2015)

Zenati v Police of the Metropolis & Anor [2015] EWCA Civ 80 (11 February 2015)

It is arguable that the police (and to a lesser extent the CPS) breached Article 5(1)(c) and 5(3) ECHR by failing to inform the court promptly of exculpatory evidence and by not progressing the investigation with due expedition, resulting in unreasonably long detention. However, the claim for false imprisonment...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2015] EWCA Civ 80
Parties
Appellant: Mr Sofian Zenati; 1st Respondent: The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis; 2nd Respondent: The Crown Prosecution Service
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court (central London) Decision Striking Out Claims Under CPR 3.4(2)(a)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in respect of Article 5 ECHR claims; appeal dismissed in respect of false imprisonment claims.
Legal Topics
Article 5 ECHR (right to Liberty), False Imprisonment, Judicial Review of Detention, Special Diligence in Criminal Investigations, Human Rights Act 1998 Section 6
Human Rights Law Tort Law Criminal Procedure Article 5 ECHR (right to Liberty) False Imprisonment Judicial Review of Detention Special Diligence in Criminal Investigations Human Rights Act 1998 Section 6

Source-derived case record

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 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Sofian Zenati

Appellant

The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis

1st Respondent

The Crown Prosecution Service

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court (central London) Decision Striking Out Claims Under CPR 3.4(2)(a)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether continued detention after exculpatory evidence was available breached Article 5(1)(c) ECHR
  2. 2 Whether delay in investigation and prosecution breached Article 5(3) ECHR
  3. 3 Whether the police and CPS are liable for false imprisonment for detention ordered by a court based on incomplete information

Ratio Decidendi

It is arguable that the police (and to a lesser extent the CPS) breached Article 5(1)(c) and 5(3) ECHR by failing to inform the court promptly of exculpatory evidence and by not progressing the investigation with due expedition, resulting in unreasonably long detention. However, the claim for false imprisonment fails as detention was by court order and the common law does not impose liability for false imprisonment in such circumstances, even if the court was not fully informed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in respect of Article 5 ECHR claims; appeal dismissed in respect of false imprisonment claims.

Orders

  • Article 5 ECHR claims reinstated for trial against both defendants.
  • False imprisonment claims dismissed.