Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
On appeal from a county court jury trial, the High Court held that arresting a 16-year-old at school was not unavoidable and was unlawful.
The court dismissed a claim for false imprisonment and assault/battery, finding the arrest lawful, necessary, properly explained, and carried out with reasonable force.
The High Court held that the detention of AH and IS was unlawful, found failures in Rule 35 and Adults at Risk safeguards, and held the Brook House system breached Article 3.
Section 54(4)(a) of PACE does not require the custody officer's belief to be reasonable; a genuine belief suffices. The use of force to remove the appellant's clothing was lawful and necessary given his conduct. The damages awarded by the recorder were excessive and not justified by the evidence.
Source excerpt
The police and bailiffs were lawfully authorised by the mortgagee to use reasonable force to enforce the possession order; the claimant, as a trespasser, had no right to resist. The police acted lawfully and proportionately in entering the property, using force, arresting, and detaining the claimant. There was no malicious prosecution or actionable false imprisonment beyond a technical delay in detention review, for which only nominal damages were awarded.
Source excerpt
Carter v Chief Constable of Essex Police [2025] EWCA Civ 367 (09 April 2025)
The Court of Appeal held that PACE s 54(4)(a) requires an actual belief, not a reasonable one, and dismissed an appeal over a detainee’s forced clothing removal.
Amadu-Abdullah v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2024] EWHC 3162 (KB) (06 December 2024)
High Court claim arising from police Taser use on a 14-year-old succeeded, with the Court finding the force unlawful and awarding damages.
The use of a taser was not objectively reasonable or proportionate in the circumstances, as the appellant was standing in a non-aggressive stance and talking to his friend, and less dangerous alternatives were available. The trial judge failed to properly assess the proportionality and objective reasonableness of the force used.
Source excerpt
Afriyie v Commissioner of Police for the City of London [2024] EWCA Civ 1269 (25 October 2024)
The Court of Appeal allowed a police battery claim, holding that taser use on a standing, non-aggressive suspect was not objectively reasonable or proportionate.
Permission to adduce expert evidence on security risk assessment, risk management, and risk mitigation is refused. The court found that the proposed evidence does not satisfy the admissibility requirements under the Kennedy test, as the issues are matters for the trial judge to determine based on factual evidence and general standards, without the need for expert interpretation. There is no sufficiently recognised or specific body of expertise requiring expert evidence, and the evidence is not reasonably required to resolve the proceedings.
Source excerpt
Explore more
