Harrison-Lowe v Chief Constable of Dyfed Powys Police

The lawfulness of an arrest without warrant depends on the information reasonably available to the constable at the time of arrest. The suspicion need not later prove correct, and the absence of a prosecution does not itself invalidate the arrest. Where the available evidence provides reasonable grounds for suspecting an arrestable offence, an appeal has no realistic prospect of success merely because the suspect disputes the allegations or was not prosecuted. The Court of Appeal may refuse permission where the proposed appeal would inevitably fail.

The applicant was arrested in January 1995 for alleged theft and criminal damage after removing stones from a neighbour’s rockery. She maintained that the stones belonged to her and had been taken from her garden. No prosecution followed.

She brought proceedings for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment. At Swansea County Court, Judge Hickinbottom withdrew the case from the jury after finding that the constable had reasonable grounds for suspecting that she had committed an offence. The applicant sought permission to appeal, arguing that the ruling was flawed. The central issue was whether the arrest was justified under section 24(6) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.

1. Application refused. Lord Justice Judge concluded that there was no realistic prospect of a successful appeal against Judge Hickinbottom’s ruling.
2. Under section 24(6) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, the relevant question was whether the constable had reasonable grounds for suspecting that the applicant had committed an arrestable offence. The assessment concerned the information available at the time of arrest, rather than whether the suspicion was ultimately proved correct.
3. The constable was entitled, on the face of the evidence, to rely on information from three separate people. The complainant said the stones had been removed from his rockery, another neighbour said she had seen the applicant taking them, and a further neighbour said that she had given the stones to the complainant rather than to the applicant. That information provided a proper basis for the suspicion.
4. The fact that the suspicion later proved wrong, and that the applicant was not prosecuted, did not make the arrest unlawful. The applicant’s distressing allegations of wider victimisation could not provide a legal basis for allowing an appeal which would inevitably fail.

Permission to appeal was therefore refused.

1. Court of Appeal (Civil Division) — On 3 July 2001, Lord Justice Judge refused permission to appeal.
2. Swansea County Court — On 13 February 2001, Judge Hickinbottom withdrew the claim from the jury after finding that the constable had reasonable grounds for suspecting the applicant of theft and/or criminal damage.