Adamson v. Martin [1916] ScotLR 237 (04 January 1916)

Adamson v. Martin [1916] ScotLR 237 (04 January 1916)

The police acted unlawfully in photographing and fingerprinting the pursuer, an untried minor not in custody, without statutory authority or consent. There is no common law right permitting such actions. The Chief-Constable is not liable in damages absent specific instructions or direct involvement. The pursuer is entitled to have the photographs and fingerprints destroyed, but not to damages from the Chief-Constable.

Citation
[1916] ScotLR 237
Parties
Pursuer: James Adamson; Defender: Matthew J. Martin, Chief-Constable, Perthshire
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
04 January 1916
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session, Inner House, Second Division
Outcome
Partially allowed; interlocutors of Sheriff and Sheriff-Substitute recalled; order for destruction of photographs and fingerprints; damages claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Reparation, Slander, Defamation by Conduct, Police Powers, Photographs and Fingerprints, Liability of Chief Constable, Statutory Interpretation
Civil Law Tort Law Criminal Procedure Police Law Reparation Slander Defamation by Conduct Police Powers +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 4 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Adamson

Pursuer

Matthew J. Martin, Chief-Constable, Perthshire

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session, Inner House, Second Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether police may lawfully photograph and take fingerprints of an untried minor not in custody without statutory authority or consent
  2. 2 Whether the Chief-Constable is liable in damages for acts of subordinate officers allegedly done under his general instructions
  3. 3 Whether the retention and placement of such photographs and fingerprints in a criminal register constitutes defamation

Ratio Decidendi

The police acted unlawfully in photographing and fingerprinting the pursuer, an untried minor not in custody, without statutory authority or consent. There is no common law right permitting such actions. The Chief-Constable is not liable in damages absent specific instructions or direct involvement. The pursuer is entitled to have the photographs and fingerprints destroyed, but not to damages from the Chief-Constable.

Court Disposition

Partially allowed; interlocutors of Sheriff and Sheriff-Substitute recalled; order for destruction of photographs and fingerprints; damages claim dismissed.

Orders

  • Order the defender to destroy within ten days all photographs, negatives, copies, and fingerprint impressions of the pursuer taken on or about 15 May 1914, in the presence of the parties' agents and the Sheriff-Clerk of Perth.
  • Dismiss the action quoad ultra (as regards damages).