Wilson v Commissioner Of Police For Metropolis

Permission to appeal should be granted where the evidence arguably cannot establish, to the necessary standard, that an alleged collision was a deliberate unlawful assault. A trial finding based principally on video evidence must be assessed against the applicable standard of proof. The Court of Appeal need not decide the substantive claim when determining whether permission should be granted.

The claimant brought proceedings against the Commissioner of Police following an incident during a disturbance in central London. He alleged that a police officer in riot gear deliberately knocked him to the ground, constituting an unlawful assault. Mr Justice Morland found for the claimant after repeatedly viewing a traffic video and concluding that the collision was deliberate.

The Commissioner sought permission to appeal. The central issue was whether the video and surrounding evidence could justify a finding of deliberate assault to the requisite standard.

1. Permission granted. The Court of Appeal considered that the Commissioner had an arguable case warranting an appeal.
2. The trial judge could properly find for the claimant only if satisfied on compelling evidence that the incident was an assault. The court referred to Hornal v Neuberger Products Ltd [1956] 3 WLR 1034 as dealing with the applicable standard of proof.
3. Although the video was not inconsistent with the claimant’s account, the events occurred extremely quickly, the camera was some distance from the collision, and many people were present. On that view, it was at least arguable that the video could not establish deliberate assault to the requisite standard.
4. Lord Justice Sedley agreed that permission should be granted. The appeal was ordered to be expedited, interlocutory directions remained undisturbed, and costs were to be costs in the appeal.

• High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division: Mr Justice Morland found that the claimant had suffered a deliberate unlawful assault.
• Court of Appeal (Civil Division): Permission to appeal was granted and the appeal was directed to be expedited.