Continue reading "Duty of care: Claims against the police post Robinson and DSD – part one"
This post is only available to members.
Duty of care: Claims against the police post Robinson and DSD – part one
In part one of a two-part analysis of claims against the police, John-Paul Swoboda examines the decision in Robinson and whether the police are exempt from negligence claims ‘Lord Reed and the other Supreme Court justices recognised that not too high a standard ought to be imposed on the police, but those observations did not …
Cases Referenced
Cases in bold have further reading - click to view related articles.
- Anns v Merton London Borough Council [1977] UKHL 4
- Brooks v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis & ors [2005] UKHL 24
- Caparo Industries plc v Dickman [1990] UKHL 2
- Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v DSD & anor [2018] UKSC 11
- Desmond v Chief Constable of Nottinghamshire Police [2011] EWCA Civ 3
- Entick v Carrington (1765) EWHC KB J98
- Hertfordshire Police v Van Colle [2008] UKHL 50
- Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [1987] UKHL 12
- Michael v Chief Constable of South Wales Police [2015] UKSC 2
- Murphy v Brentwood District Council [1991] UKHL 2
- Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police [2018] UKSC 4
- Stovin v Wise [1996] UKHL 15
- Sumner v Colborne & ors [2018] EWCA Civ 1006