Linse, R (On the Application Of) v North Wales Police

Damages for conversion are assessed by reference to the market value of the goods at the time of conversion, rather than a new-for-old valuation. Consequential loss must be reasonably foreseeable. Loss of income is not recoverable where the unlawful detention or sale of property gives no indication that it would be used to generate that income. Damages for injured feelings caused by interference with chattels are not ordinarily recoverable, although the claimant’s distress may be relevant to aggravated or exemplary damages. Exemplary damages may be awarded against government servants where their conduct is arbitrary and falls within the first category identified in Rookes v Barnard [1964] AC 1129.

The claimant previously obtained judicial review relief after the defendant unlawfully detained and sold her vehicle despite production of a valid insurance certificate. The earlier judgment was [2020] EWHC 1288 (Admin). The present hearing assessed damages for the unlawful detention and sale.

The claimant sought compensation for the vehicle, missing contents, lost income, living expenses and emotional upset. The court considered the proper valuation of the vehicle, recoverability of consequential economic loss, liability for missing contents, and whether aggravated or exemplary damages were available.

1. The court assessed the vehicle at its market value at the time of conversion, rather than on a new-for-old basis. The relevant principle was drawn from Kuwait Airways Corporation v Iraqi Airways Co (Nos 4 and 5) [2002] UKHL 19. On the evidence, the market value was assessed at £25,000.
2. The missing contents were considered item by item. The court accepted that the laptop, fur coat and oil painting had been in the vehicle and were lost while in police custody, but rejected the claims for the photographic afterimage and tailored suits. Their market values were assessed by reference to the evidence rather than current listing or gallery prices.
3. Loss of income from intended artwork sales was not recoverable. Damages for conversion had to be reasonably foreseeable, and nothing about the vehicle or the circumstances of its detention and sale indicated that it would be used to generate such income. In any event, the evidence showed that the income had been delayed rather than lost.
4. Damages for emotional upset caused by unlawful interference with chattels were not recoverable as a separate head. The court accepted the principle relied on from Cash & Brown v Chief Constable of Lancashire [2008] EWHC 396 (Ch), while recognising that such upset could be relevant to aggravated or exemplary damages.
5. The failure to return the vehicle after an internal communication confirming that the insurance was valid was arbitrary government conduct. Applying the first category identified in Rookes v Barnard [1964] AC 1129, exemplary damages were appropriate. No separate award of aggravated damages was made.
6. The claimant was entitled to damages in the total sum stated in the judgment. The parties were directed to attempt to agree consequential matters, including interest and costs, and to file a draft order within 14 days.

The judgment concerned the assessment of damages following the court’s earlier judicial review determination that the defendant’s decision was unlawful: [2020] EWHC 1288 (Admin).