Sarah Hemingway of Garden Court Chambers Civil Liberties Team acted for the claimants, instructed by Gregsons Solicitors.
Full judgment: Searson & Anor v Chief Constable of Nottingham Constabulary [2025] EWHC 1982 (KB)
The two claimants, a married couple, had been arrested and taken to Mansfield police station for interviews following historical allegations of criminality.
However, following the first claimant’s interview, and during the second claimant’s interview, the police inspector authorised the claimants to be detained further. This decision was made without consulting the second claimant or their legal representative.
Both claimants were later released without any charge resulting from the investigation.
In the County Court, the claimants’ proceedings for false imprisonment were dismissed. The claimants sought leave to appeal to the High Court but were only granted permission to appeal on one out of five grounds.
The claimants’ appeal was heard in the High Court on the basis that the second claimant’s detention it did not comply with section 40 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE).
Specifically, as the inspector failed to consult the second claimant or her solicitor before authorising the detention, the second claimant’s detention beyond that point may be deemed unlawful.
The High Court found the lack of consultation meant that the review officer had failed to comply with his duty under section 40 (12).
The High Court awarded the second appellant nominal damages, as the Judge found that, had the Defendant conducted a lawful review under s40 PACE, her continued detention would have been authorised, and she would have been held in custody.
