Farleys were instructed on behalf of Mr B in connection with a claim for False Imprisonment and Misfeasance in Public Office following Mr B’s detention.
Mr B and his ex wife had an argument at home and his wife became violent towards him and began physically attacking him. Mr B was extremely concerned because their daughter was present in the room therefore he called the police. His wife began to calm down once Mr B had phoned the police and by the time they arrived everything had calmed down. They both agreed beforehand that if the police turned up they would explain that it was a heated argument that had got out of hand and matters had been resolved. Three Police officers turned up at the house and were content that there were going to be no further problems and no further action was taken.
There were no problems over the weekend that followed and on the Monday, Mr B went to work as usual. His ex wife was a serving officer of the force involved.
His ex wife discussed the incident with her Superior and complained of her wrist being sore. Given that it is procedure to explain what has happened when there is police involvement with a serving officer she explained what had happened. She did not make a complaint nor make a formal statement. Nevertheless, someone within the force took the decision to arrest the Mr B four days later.
Mr B was arrested on suspicion of committing assault pursuant to S47 of the OAPA in connection with what had happened previously. He was detained for nearly 24 hours and thereafter released without charge.
How Farleys’ Claims Against Public Authorities Department Helped
Farleys argued that the Mr B’s detention was unlawful on the basis that it was not necessary to arrest him for the said incident 4 days later. Furthermore, it was not necessary on the grounds that officers had already attended to matters on the evening of the incident and were satisfied that no further action was deemed necessary. Further to this the Mr B was held in police custody for an unreasonably long period of time in the circumstances.
It was further argued that the arrest gave rise to a claim for misfeasance in public office. It was argued that the way in which this matter was dealt with and particular the arrest, was motivated by the fact that the alleged victim was a serving police officer and was known to those making the decision to arrest.
Following receipt of the letter of claim the Police investigated liability and advised that they were prepared to settle the claim. Farleys experienced team of specialist solicitors secured Mr B damages in the sum of £5,250 and successfully recovered his legal costs.