LAST week the Supreme Court decision in the case of Joanna Michael underlined the long-standing legal principle that the police cannot be sued for negligence.

It is possible to make claims for compensation against the police for a variety of matters. These include malfeasance in a public office i.e. corruption, assault and unlawful arrest.

What it is not possible to do, however, is sue the police if they make a mistake.

This legal protection for the police arose following the Yorkshire Ripper case in 1981. As is now well known, the investigation into Peter Sutcliffe was largely bungled by the police. The family of the last victim to be killed sued West Yorkshire Police, arguing that the investigation was so negligent that their daughter would still be alive if they had followed up the clues. The House of Lords ruled that police forces were “immune from an action of this kind” and did not have a duty of care towards the victim.

This matter arose again in the case of Duwayne Brooks, who was the best friend of murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence and was with him on the night he was killed. The two friends were set upon by a gang of white youths. Mr Brooks rang emergency services but claimed officers regarded him as a suspect rather than a victim and dismissed his account of the murder. Mr Brooks started legal action against the Metropolitan Police in 1999. In 2002, the Court of Appeal ruled he could sue the police for negligence and 13 officers for breach of the Race Relations Act. However, the House of Lords struck out the claim for negligence saying that Mr Brooks was free to pursue only the racism claim.

Joanna Michael was 25 when she was murdered by her former boyfriend. When he broke into her home she dialled 999 but the call was misdirected to the wrong force and was later downgraded. The police arrived an hour later, by which time she was dead.

The justification for the immunity given to the police is stated to be because of public policy. The highest court in the land is not prepared to confirm that the police have a duty of care. The reasoning is that the police should not be inhibited on going about their crime prevention duties for fear of being sued for damages if they make a mistake.

The Supreme Court decision in the case of Joanna Michael is a great disappointment to a number of campaigners. A number of cases in the lower courts were awaiting the outcome of the case before proceeding and will likely now not proceed further.

This is, however, not an issue that is going to go away. Recent revelations about the abuse suffered by children in Oxford and in Rotherham have again raised the question as to whether victims can sue the police for negligence. There is a move in the direction of human rights overturning the public policy reasons behind the immunity. Victims may be able to bring actions under the Human Rights Act 1988 claiming that there has been a failure to protect them from inhuman acts pursuant to Article 3.