Key Facts
- •Andrew Reynolds (Claimant) was falsely imprisoned and assaulted by Kent Police officers from December 20, 2015, to December 26, 2015.
- •The Canterbury County Court found in favor of the Claimant on false imprisonment and assault but dismissed the claim due to the Claimant's fundamental dishonesty under section 57 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015.
- •The Claimant appealed the finding of fundamental dishonesty and other aspects of the County Court's decision.
- •The agreed damages, had the claim not been dismissed, were £6,000.
- •The Claimant's allegations of assault involved claims of being thrown to the ground, dragged, and subjected to various forms of physical abuse by the officers.
- •The jury found in favor of the Police on most of the assault allegations.
- •The Claimant's account of when he experienced back pain was inconsistent across various statements and testimonies.
- •The Claimant's back injury was sustained, but the judge found the police were not responsible for it.
Legal Principles
Fundamental dishonesty under section 57 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015.
Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015
Test for dishonesty (objective standard from Ivey v Genting Casinos).
Ivey v Genting Casinos Limited [2017] 3 WLR 1212
Requirements for pleading and proving fundamental dishonesty.
LOCOG v Sinfield [2018] PIQR P8, Cojanu v Kent Partnership University NHS Trust [2022] EWHC 197 (QB), Jenkinson v Robertson [2022] EWHC 791
Meaning of substantial injustice under section 57.
LOCOG v Sinfield [2018] PIQR P8, Woodger v Hallas [2022] EWHC 1561
False imprisonment as trespass to the person; not a personal injury claim.
Clerk & Lindsell (24th Ed. at 14-24), Collins v Wilcock [1984] 1 W.L.R. 1172, Walker v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2015] 1 WLR 312, Bird v Jones (1845) 7 Q.B. 742, Meering v Grahame-White Aviation Co (1919) 112 L.T. 44
Reasonable force in self-defense against unlawful arrest.
Walker v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2015] 1 WLR 312
Burden of proof in cases of injury sustained in state custody.
Sheppard v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002] EWCA Civ 1921
Adequate warning and opportunity to address allegations of fundamental dishonesty.
Jenkinson v Robertson [2022] EWHC 791 (QB)
Outcomes
Appeal partially allowed.
The judge erred in dismissing the false imprisonment claim under section 57 as it's not a personal injury claim. The finding of fundamental dishonesty regarding the assault claims was upheld.
False imprisonment claim reinstated.
Section 57 of the 2015 Act does not apply to false imprisonment claims.
Assault claim dismissed.
The judge's finding of fundamental dishonesty regarding the assault claims was supported by evidence of multiple lies and inconsistencies in the Claimant's statements and testimony.
Damages for false imprisonment to be reassessed.
The matter was remitted to the County Court for determination of damages unless the parties reach an agreement.
Costs to be determined.
The matter of costs was also remitted to the County Court judge for reassessment.