Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary (R, on the application of) v Police Misconduct Panel

Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary (R, on the application of) v Police Misconduct Panel

The Panel's findings on the content and effect of the telephone calls were adequately reasoned and within the range of reasonable decisions, but its decision to impose a final written warning rather than dismissal was inadequately explained and inconsistent with its own findings regarding the failure to follow a superior officer's advice and the seriousness of the harm, thus requiring the outcome decision to be quashed and remitted for reconsideration.

Parties
Claimant: Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary; Defendant: Police Misconduct Panel; Interested Party: PC Jack Large; Interested Party: PC James Barker
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 October 2026
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; outcome decision quashed and remitted for reconsideration.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review of Disciplinary Decisions, Police Misconduct, Adequacy of Reasons, Sanctions in Professional Misconduct, Standard of Proof in Disciplinary Proceedings
Administrative Law Police Law Employment Law Judicial Review of Disciplinary Decisions Police Misconduct Adequacy of Reasons Sanctions in Professional Misconduct Standard of Proof in Disciplinary Proceedings

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary

Claimant

Police Misconduct Panel

Defendant

PC Jack Large

Interested Party

PC James Barker

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Police Misconduct Panel failed to consider material evidence and provide adequate reasons regarding the conduct of PC Large in telephone calls to MB
  2. 2 Whether the Panel's findings on pressure exerted on MB were irrational or inconsistent with the evidence
  3. 3 Whether the Panel's decision on sanction (final written warning) was inconsistent with its factual findings and outside the range of reasonable responses

Ratio Decidendi

The Panel's findings on the content and effect of the telephone calls were adequately reasoned and within the range of reasonable decisions, but its decision to impose a final written warning rather than dismissal was inadequately explained and inconsistent with its own findings regarding the failure to follow a superior officer's advice and the seriousness of the harm, thus requiring the outcome decision to be quashed and remitted for reconsideration.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; outcome decision quashed and remitted for reconsideration.

Orders

  • The decision on outcome (sanction) is quashed and remitted to the Police Misconduct Panel for reconsideration in accordance with the Guidance and relevant case law.
  • No order as to anonymity for MB continues.