In the second article for Police Professional by members of the Serjeants’ Inn Police Team Debra Powell and Susanna Rickard, argue that, in wake of recent cases, there needs to be clear guidance for joint working between police and health services for the care of people suffering from mental disorder.

The Divisional Court has required the Director of the Serious Fraud Office to pay the Claimants’ costs on an indemnity basis following their successful challenge to search warrants obtained by the SFO.

The High Court has given a significant ruling in J, R (on the application of) v The Chief Constable of Devon & Cornwall [2012] EWHC 2996 (Admin) concerning what information should or, as in this case, should not be disclosed by the police on an Enhanced Criminal Records Certificate (ECRC).

In X (South Yorkshire) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor [2012] EWHC 2954 (Admin), the Administrative Court has declared that, in certain limited respects, the Child Sex Offender Disclosure (CSOD) Scheme affords insufficient protection to a convicted child sex offender’s right to privacy under ECHR Article 8. There were two aspects of the CSOD Guidance that caused the Court concern.

In R (Cubells) v IPCC [2012] EWCA Civ 1292, the Court of Appeal heard an appeal from Simon J’s refusal of a renewed application for permission to claim judicial review of the IPCC’s decision to reject Mr Cubells’ appeal against Greater Manchester Police’s (GMP’s) determination of his complaint.

The Government has now laid before Parliament amended Regulations dealing with the procedures for police conduct, performance and rules covering appeals to the Police Appeals Tribunal. The changes are due to come into effect on 22nd November 2012.

A commentary on the principle changes to each of these regimes will follow in the coming days. In the meantime, links to the Rules and Regulations are set out below:

Police Appeals Tribunal Rules 2012

The Police (Performance) Regulations 2012

The Police (Conduct) Regulations 2012

After reading our case update on Stewart & Green, one of our readers contacted the editor and brought an important, but unreported, judgment to our attention.

The Azelle Rodney Inquiry is a public inquiry into the death of Mr Rodney, who was shot by a police officer during a “hard stop” on 30 April 2005. A public inquiry chaired by Sir Christopher Holland was set up because of the need to consider “secret evidence”, which could not be disclosed to a Coroner or explored before a jury in an Article 2 ECHR compliant Coroner’s Inquest.

Members of the Serjeants’ Inn Police Team write a monthly Legal Update for Police Professional. By agreement with the editors, the UK Police Law Blog will bring you our Team’s Police Professional articles one month after they appear in print.

In this article, published on 13 September 2012, John Beggs QC and James Berry analyse the Court of Appeal’s decision in Salter v Chief Constable of Dorset [2012] EWCA Civ 1047 which contains important guidance on the approach that police misconduct panels and the PAT should take to sanction (or “outcome”) in cases of dishonesty. John and James appeared for the Chief Constable of Dorset in the Court of Appeal and in the Administrative Court in what was the first successful judicial review challenge to a decision of the PAT.

The Government is considering proposals to open police misconduct hearings to the public. Presently the usual rule is that police misconduct hearings are held in private, pursuant to regulation 32 of the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2008.

The IPCC has launched a consultation on the way it investigates deaths during and after contact with police. The IPCC is consulting on a number of issues including how the IPCC investigates:

  • deaths in police custody;
  • deaths during or following police contact;
  • road traffic fatalities;
  • fatal shootings;
  • apparent suicides following police contact; and
  • other deaths following police contact.

Our cut off date for police-related legal developments on the UK Police Law Blog was 1 August 2012. This decision was handed down on 1 August 2012 (and it has been a quiet summer / early autumn since then).

In R (Chief Constable of the Derbyshire Constabulary) v Police Appeals Tribunal & Green & Stewart [2012] EWHC 2280 (Admin) it was established that:

  • A Regulation 21 Notice should set out which of the Standards of Professional Behaviour the officer is alleged to have breached
  • A misconduct panel can consider Standards other than those specified in the Regulation 21 Notice if appropriate procedural safeguards are put in place (eg. adjournments so that the officer can consider the new allegations)
  • The PAT’s power under Rule 4(4)(a) of the PAT Rules 2008 is limited to a review of the misconduct panel’s findings. The PAT does not conduct a rehearing. While not strictly a Wednesbury review, the appellant must establish that the misconduct panel’s findings were “unreasonable”

Section 23 of the Police Act 1996 provides for chief officers of 2 or more police forces to make arrangements to discharge their police functions jointly where it appears to the chief offices that those functions can be discharged more efficiently or effectively on a joint basis.

On 1 October 2012 the National Police Air Service was launched, in what is understood to be the first use of s.23 of Police Act 1996 to underpin national collaboration arrangement. Until October, air support was delivered locally by 30 Police Air Support Units. By the time NPAS is implemented in full in January 2015, it will provide for a unified air service comprising 25 aircraft based at 23 strategic locations. ACPO anticipates that this move will generate a saving of up to £15 million per year. See: http://www.acpo.presscentre.com/Press-Releases/National-Police-Air-Service-is-launched-1a8.aspx 

Cases involving the police throw up some of the most interesting issues for lawyers across a whole variety of areas of law. But decisions handed down by the Courts often contain important guidance for police officers. For instance in a recent case on search warrants, the High Court declared that “The necessary foundation for the issue of the warrants should be on the face of the information unless there are good reasons for not including it there. Police practice to the contrary should be changed forthwith.” But how many police officers were (until now) aware of this stern edict? And how many officers had read the Court’s judgment.

At the UK Police Law Blog we aim to keep police officers and those who advise them up to date with key decisions affecting their work – especially where the Courts provide guidance. We will also report on important changes in legislation and statutory guidance affecting the police. We won’t be blogging about criminal law (generally) – just “civil” police law.

All of the bloggers at the UK Police Law Blog are barristers at 3 Serjeants’ Inn Chambers. We have consistently been recognised as a leading set of barristers chambers. We have a top tier Police Team that has been representing police forces and police officers in the whole spectrum of police-related litigation as well as providing operational advice for over 20 years.

You can follow the UK Police Law Blog on Twitter at: @ukpolicelawblog

You can also read our legal column in Police Professional, which will appear on the UK Police Blog a month after it appears in print.

Finally…we need your help. Our editors will be scouring the internet for police-related legal developments, but if you find any that we have missed please email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

Please email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. if you have any difficulties with the UK Police Law Blog or any suggestions, which are always welcome.