R v Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall, ex parte Hay ; R v Same, ex parte Police Complaints Authority
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 21 November 1996 |
| Date | 21 November 1996 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division |
Queen's Bench Division
Before Mr Justice Sedley
Police - judicial and administrative functions - requirement
A police chief who was invited to require the retirement of one of his officers faced with disciplinary proceedings had to weigh the case for retirement against the interest of the police service and the public in seeing disciplinary proceedings against the officer to their end.
The need to separate the charging and judicial functions in police disciplinary procedures required a clear separation of the prosecutorial function from the overall administration of the force. The charging and judicial functions needed to be kept separate not only from one another but from the administrative function of the chief constable as head of his force.
Mr Justice Sedley so held in the Queen's Bench Division in a judgment delivered in Sheffield granting applications by Robert Hay and the Police Complaints Authority for certiorari to quash a decision of Mr Walter Girven, a senior officer of a neighbouring police force acting as the agent of the Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall, to dismiss disciplinary charges against Chief Inspector Alan Paul McArthur and ordering that the chief constable determine the charges on their substantive merits.
Mr Philip Sapsford, QC and Mr Philip Engleman for Mr Hay; Mr James Turner for the PCA; Mr Anthony Donne, QC and Miss Sue Campbell for the chief constable; Mr Martin Picton for Chief Inspector McArthur.
MR JUSTICE SEDLEY said officers under the command of Chief Inspector McArthur and Superintendent Roger Mechan had on October 13, 1993, shot dead Ian Fitzgerald Hay during a siege at Crabadon Manor, near Diptford, Devon.
The Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall had referred the matter to the Police Complaints Authority for investigation and the authority had recommended disciplinary proceedings against both Mr McArthur and Mr Mechan. The chief constable did not agree there should be proceedings against Mr McArthur, but the PCA had insisted that he be charged with having failed to plan the siege properly.
The dead man's brother, the applicant Robert Hay, was informed and he asked whether the family could be represented at the hearing, but they were told that as they were not complainants they had no right to be represented.
On April 27, 1995, the chief constable gave...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ackermon v CI Govt
...R. v. Avon County Council, ex p.Terry Adams Ltd., [1994] Env. L.R. 442, applied. (6) R. v. Chief Const.(Devon & Cornwall), ex p.Hay, [1996] 2 All E.R. 711, applied. (7) R. v. Cotswold District Council, ex p.Barrington Parish Council(1998), 75 P. & C.R. 515, referred to. (8) R. v. Dairy Prod......
-
Cheltenham Borough Council v Christine Susan Laird
...[2005] 2 All ER 890 per Wilkie J at paras 45, 49, 54 and 62–65; cf. see R v. Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall ex p. Hay [1996] 2 All ER 711 per Sedley J at 725a-d. 446 CBC strongly disputed that it unreasonably delayed agreeing to ill health retirement. In this regard I make the follow......
-
Maharaj v National Energy Corporation of Trinidad and Tobago
...clear and prompt notice that the decision is challenged.” (p 61) Similarly, in R v Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall, Ex p Hay [1996] 2 All ER 711, Sedley J observed (at p 732A): “While I do not lose sight of the requirement of RSC Order 53 rule 4 for promptness, irrespective of the fo......
-
Cheltenham Borough Council v Laird
... ... ” He dismissed Mr Shaw's complaints in relation to the bill of sale, which he ... ...
-
Police Complaints and Criminal Prosecutions
...n 2 above, vol II 117.72 ibid 118.73 ibid 119.74 ibid 127.75 RvChief Constable of the Devon and Cornwall Constabulary, ex p Hay [1996] 2 All ER 711.76 Fisher vOldham Corporation [1936] 2 KB 364.77 n 2 above, vol II 154.The Modern Law Review [Vol. 64384 ßThe Modern Law Review Limited is that......