Term
| Orange v chief constable of west yorkshire police |
|
Definition
| the duty in reeves was not to treat every prisoner as a suicide risk. the case involved a married man with young children, who was arrested for being drunk and placed in a police cell. there was no reason to suspect he was a suicide risk, the duty lai down in reeves was a duty to take reaosnable steps to sicover whther an individual prison was a suicide risk and act accordingly. |
|
|
Term
| reeves v comissioner of police for the metropolis |
|
Definition
A man committed suicide in police custody, he was totally sane, and it was argued that th polce could not be resonsible for the fact that he had chosen to kill himself.
The court of appeal held that there was a duty to take reasonable care as to prvent the prisoner from commiting suice, a positive duty like this was unreasonable but was justified by the very high degree of control which the police would have over a prisoner, and the well-known high risk of suicide among suspects held in this way. |
|
|
Term
| Vellino v chief constable of greater manchester |
|
Definition
| Mr vellino was a career criminal who had been arrested many times. on this occasion the police had gone to his flat to arrest him and he had tired to escape by jumping from the second floor window to the ground floor below. this time he had seriously injured himself and ended up with brain damage . he sued the polce arguing that they were under a duty to prevent him from escaping, and their failure to do so had caused his injuries. he sued the polcie, arguing that they were under a duty to prevent him from escaping, and their failure to so so had caused his injuries. It was foreseeabe that he would try to escape and that injury would result. This was rejected by the C.O.A rejected this argument entirely. |
|
|
Term
| Costello v chief constable of northumbria police |
|
Definition
| the claimant was a police constable who was attacked by a prisoner in a police cell. A police inspector was nearby, but despite her screams failed to come to her aid. It was held that the defendant was liable as he had assumed responsibility in circumstances such as these/ |
|
|
Term
| Barett v Ministry of defence |
|
Definition
| The MOD was sued by the widowof a naval pilo who had died by choking on his own vomit agter becoing so drunk that he passed out. He had been found unconcious and the officer had organised for him to be taken up to his own room, but nobody had been toldto watch over him and make sure he didnt choke. the court heard that extreme drunkeness was common on the remot base where the death happened, and the offier in charge admitted that he had not fulfilled his responsibility, of discouraging drunkeness at the base. However at the C.O.A it was held that once the officer had ordered an unconcious man to be taken up to his room he had from tha poit assumed responsibility for his welfare and had been neglignet in not summoning medical help or watching over him. |
|
|
Term
| Capital and Countries PLC v Hampshire County Council |
|
Definition
| Where a defendant actually creates a dangerous situation- even if the risk is created through no fault of the defendant- the courts may impose a positive duty to deal with the danger |
|
|
