Recent Judicial Decisions
| Date | 01 July 1965 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X6503800710 |
| Published date | 01 July 1965 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
W.
H.
D.
WINDER,
M.A.,
LL.M.
Legal Correspondent
a/THE
POLICE
JOURNAL
POWER
OF ARREST:
PERSON
APPARENTLY COMMITTING
OFFENCE
Wiltshire v. Barrett
" A police constable may arrest without warrant a person com-
mitting an offence under this section." These words are to be found
in s. 6 (4) of the Road Traffic Act, 1960, and in other statutes, too, in
the same or similar sense. In all instances the question is always
likely to arise as to whether the Act permits arrest without warrant
of a person apparently committing the offence although he may not
in fact have committed it. In the civil action for damages brought
against a police officer for assault in the case
of
Wiltshire v. Barrett
[1965] 2 W.L.R. 1195, it was held that in respect of the offence of
driving or attempting to drive while unfit through drink it is not
necessary that this offence should have been committed in order that
the power to arrest without warrant should be legally exercisable.
The police constable is justified in making an arrest if the facts as
they reasonably appeared to him at the time were such as to warrant
his bringing the motorist before the court on the ground that he was
unfit to drive through drink. The Court of Appeal was clear that on
the true construction of s. 6 (4) of the Road Traffic Act, 1960,
" committing an offence"
meant"
apparently committing an offence".
The defendant in the civil action and another police constable
signalled to the plaintiff to stop his car because they thought that he
was driving too fast. The plaintiff did stop but he refused either
to give his name and address or to get out of the car. The constables
decided that in view of his appearance and behaviour the plaintiff
was unfit to drive through drink and they arrested him without a
warrant, under s. 6 of the Road Traffic Act, 1960. The plaintiff was
injured whilst being forced out of the car and was taken to a police
station where he was examined by a doctor who was of the opinion
that he was not unfit to drive through drink. The officer in charge of
the police station thereupon released the plaintiff from custody
without charging him or requiring him to enter into a recognizance
to appear before a magistrates' court or to appear at the police
station. The matter was referred to the chief constable who decided
July 1965 330
To continue reading
Request your trial