Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police v Police Misconduct Panel
The Panel’s decision that PC White’s conduct amounted to misconduct but not gross misconduct was not irrational; the Panel’s findings and reasoning were open to it on the evidence and did not demonstrate misunderstanding of the relevant legal standards. The Chief Constable had capacity to bring the challenge as the Panel was sufficiently independent.
- Parties
- Claimant: Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police; Defendant: Police Misconduct Panel; Interested Party: PC5671 Mark White
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 04 May 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review / Judgment
- Outcome
- Claim dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Judicial Review of Disciplinary Panel, Police Misconduct, Standards of Professional Behaviour, Capacity to Challenge Disciplinary Decisions
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police
Claimant
Police Misconduct Panel
Defendant
PC5671 Mark White
Interested Party
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Panel’s decision that the breaches amounted only to misconduct was irrational
- 2 Whether the Chief Constable has capacity to bring the challenge
Ratio Decidendi
The Panel’s decision that PC White’s conduct amounted to misconduct but not gross misconduct was not irrational; the Panel’s findings and reasoning were open to it on the evidence and did not demonstrate misunderstanding of the relevant legal standards. The Chief Constable had capacity to bring the challenge as the Panel was sufficiently independent.
Court Disposition
Claim dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment