Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 14 JUNE 2011

Preventing The Unnecessary Arrest Of Your Client

‘To allow the prompt and effective investigation of the offence’ is a familiar reason given by police officers to justify the arrest of a suspect.

United KingdomCriminal Law
Adam Payter
Adam Payter

'To allow the prompt and effective investigation of the offence' is a familiar reason given by police officers to justify the arrest of a suspect. However, it is a requirement of a lawful arrest that a constable has reasonable grounds for believing that an arrest is necessary for that purpose. But what does the test of necessity mean and how should it be applied in practice? These were the issues to be decided by Slade J. in the High Court in Richardson v The Chief Constable of West Midlands Police [2011] EWHC 773. The case concerned a teacher, accused of assaulting a pupil, who sought damages for false imprisonment following his arrest at a police station at which he had attended voluntarily for interview. The decision is essential for defence practitioners who wish to make representations against the arrest of clients who voluntarily attend for interview.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from