Manley v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis

Guideline brackets for damages in police misconduct cases assist consistency but must not be applied mechanistically. In malicious prosecution, compensation addresses damage to reputation, the risk of conviction and loss of liberty or property, and pecuniary loss caused by defending the charge. A claimant’s bad character may reduce reputational loss, but it may also increase the risk of conviction and punishment. Where police officers fabricate charges, use gratuitous violence, humiliate the claimant and persist in lies at criminal and civil trials, basic damages may fail to provide sufficient compensation. Aggravated damages may then be required. Exemplary damages ordinarily have a limited role where the defendant is the employer of the officers and is not itself the wrongdoer.

The claimant brought claims for assault, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution arising from police conduct. A jury found substantial liability, including gratuitous baton strikes and CS-gas use, fabricated allegations and continued lies at the criminal and civil trials. It awarded £1,000 for assault, £7,500 for false imprisonment and £1,500 for malicious prosecution, with no aggravated or exemplary damages.

The trial judge directed the jury by reference to the guidance in Thompson v Commissioner of Police [1997] 2 All ER 762, including brackets of £4,000–£5,000 for malicious prosecution. The claimant appealed, principally contending that the malicious-prosecution award and the refusal of aggravated damages were inadequate. The central issues were the effect of his criminal record, the proper guidance on the heads of compensation, and whether the facts required aggravated damages.

1. Appeal allowed. The award for malicious prosecution was increased from £1,500 to £4,000, and £10,000 was awarded as aggravated damages. The awards for assault and false imprisonment were not challenged.
2. Section 8(1) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 had lowered the barrier to appellate intervention in this class of damages case. The guidance in Thompson v Commissioner of Police [1997] 2 All ER 762 should be followed, but guideline figures identify an appropriate bracket only and must not be applied mechanistically.
3. Malicious-prosecution damages have three elements: damage to reputation; the danger of losing liberty or property, including the risk of conviction; and pecuniary loss caused by defending the charge. Bad character may reduce reputational damage, but the court must also consider any increased risk of conviction or punishment and the resulting stress and anxiety.
4. The claimant’s conduct was not causative of the malicious prosecution. The serious allegation, the fabricated charges, the lies at the criminal and civil trials, the gratuitous violence and the humiliating treatment meant that the basic awards did not sufficiently compensate him.
5. The officers had behaved in a high-handed, insulting, malicious and oppressive manner. A reasonable jury could not have awarded less than £10,000 aggravated damages. The case was not one for exemplary damages, given the limited role of that remedy where the defendant is the employer rather than the wrongdoer and the risk of double counting with aggravated damages.

• Court of Appeal (Civil Division) — The appeal from the Central London Civil Justice Centre was allowed. The award for malicious prosecution was increased to £4,000 and £10,000 was awarded for aggravated damages.
• Central London Civil Justice Centre — Following a jury trial, the claimant received £1,000 for assault, £7,500 for false imprisonment and £1,500 for malicious prosecution. No aggravated or exemplary damages were awarded.