March 2019
« Jul    

Regina (Green) v Police Complaints Authority and Others; QBD 21 Dec 2001

References: Times 17-Jan-2002, Gazette 06-Mar-2002
Coram: Moses J
The applicant complained about a breach of his human rights by police behaviour and sought to inspect statements made by eye witnesses to the incidents complained of. The Police Complaints Authority replied that it was necessary for their function to disclose such statements.
Held: Public confidence in the adherence of the state to the rule of law required the involvement of the victim to the extent necessary to safeguard his legitimate interests. That could not be satisfied merely by providing reasoned decisions, and the Authority had failed to discharge its duties to the applicant.
Statutes: Police Act 1996 80(1)(a)
This case is cited by:

  • Appeal from – The Police Complaints Authority and Others v Regina CA ([2002] EWCA Civ 389, Bailii, [2002] UKHRR 985)
    Simon Brown LJ said: ‘Given the PCA’s right under section 76(7)(b) to such other information as they need for the purpose of reaching their section 76 decision, I am inclined to think that, if, after obtaining the complainant’s comments upon any . .
  • At First Instance – Regina v Police Complaints Authority ex parte Green HL (House of Lords, [2004] UKHL 6, Bailii, Times 27-Feb-04, Gazette 25-Mar-04, [2004] 1 WLR 725, [2004] 2 All ER 209, [2004] HRLR 19, [2004] UKHRR 939)
    Discovery was sought of statements created during the investigation of a complaint against a police officer. The claimant argued that a police officer had deliberately driven his car at him.
    Held: The investigation by a separate police force . .

Last Update: 01-Oct-15 Ref: 167401

Leave a Reply