Magill v Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland (Rev2) [2022] NICA 49 (23 September 2022)

Magill v Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland (Rev2) [2022] NICA 49 (23 September 2022)

The plaintiff's amended statement of claim, alleging both positive acts and omissions by police officers potentially creating a danger, narrowly discloses a reasonable cause of action under the exceptions established in Robinson and related case law, and thus should not be struck out at this interlocutory stage.

Citation
[2022] NICA 49
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Kevin Magill; Defendant/appellant: Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
23 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Appeal From High Court (king's Bench Division) / Interlocutory Appeal Against Strike Out Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; order of High Court affirmed.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Duty of Care, Police Liability, Strike Out Applications, Assumption of Responsibility
Tort Law Public Law Negligence Duty of Care Police Liability Strike Out Applications Assumption of Responsibility

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kevin Magill

Plaintiff/respondent

Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From High Court (king's Bench Division) / Interlocutory Appeal Against Strike Out Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the police owe a duty of care in negligence for acts and omissions during operational policing
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff's amended statement of claim discloses a reasonable cause of action against the police
  3. 3 Whether the case fits within exceptions to general police immunity from suit

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's amended statement of claim, alleging both positive acts and omissions by police officers potentially creating a danger, narrowly discloses a reasonable cause of action under the exceptions established in Robinson and related case law, and thus should not be struck out at this interlocutory stage.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; order of High Court affirmed.

Orders

  • Both parties’ costs in the cause at all three judicial levels.
  • Case to proceed to trial with discovery and possible interrogatories/admissions.