X v Ministry of Defence & Anor [2017] NICA 66 (06 November 2017)

X v Ministry of Defence & Anor [2017] NICA 66 (06 November 2017)

There is a serious issue to be tried in relation to the tort of misfeasance in public office, but an interlocutory injunction is refused because the threat is not ongoing, there is no evidence of further risk, and the ongoing Police Ombudsman investigation is a sufficient safeguard. The appeal is dismissed.

Citation
[2017] NICA 66
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: X; First Defendant (discontinued): Ministry of Defence; Second Defendant/respondent: Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
06 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Refusal of Interlocutory Injunction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Misfeasance in Public Office, Assault, Harassment, Misuse of Private Information, Jurisdiction Under RIPA, Interlocutory Injunctions, Full and Frank Disclosure, Anonymity Orders
Public Law Tort Law Human Rights Law Misfeasance in Public Office Assault Harassment Misuse of Private Information Jurisdiction Under RIPA +3 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 6 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

X

Plaintiff/appellant

Ministry of Defence

First Defendant (discontinued)

Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland

Second Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Refusal of Interlocutory Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court had jurisdiction or the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) had exclusive jurisdiction under RIPA for actions incompatible with Convention rights
  2. 2 Whether the facts disclosed a serious issue to be tried in misfeasance in public office, assault, harassment, or misuse of private information
  3. 3 Whether an interlocutory injunction should be granted to restrain threatened disclosure of information about the appellant

Ratio Decidendi

There is a serious issue to be tried in relation to the tort of misfeasance in public office, but an interlocutory injunction is refused because the threat is not ongoing, there is no evidence of further risk, and the ongoing Police Ombudsman investigation is a sufficient safeguard. The appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No interlocutory injunction granted
  • Anonymity and reporting restriction orders confirmed