0370 270 6000

Regina v Sanghera

27 October 2000
The issues

Police – are they justified without occupiers consent – searching premises of robbery victim.

The facts

Appellant was the victim of an armed robbery. He was a Postmaster. He handed his keys to the Post Office to the Police.

Two days after his complaint a Police search authorisation was completed. The words “searched with consent” were ticked. It as unsigned and consent was not in fact obtained. In the process of the search the Police discovered a large amount of cash in a box above the safe. Subsequently, the Claimant was surveyed following application to the Chief Constable. The Appellant was subsequently tried for theft. The Appellant argued that evidence of what had been found should not be given because it had been unlawfully obtained since the search had been conducted in Code B.

The Crown contended that because the Code did not apply to routine search of crime searches the Appellant’s argument had no substance because the Post Office was a scene of crime. Secondly, the Crown argued that the Code was designed to protect those under suspicion and not victims.

The decision

i) Although the searched commenced as a routine scene of crime search it was a routine scene of crime search by the time the money was detected. The exception in the Code was not intended to cover such circumstances.

ii) The Code should be regarded as applying generally to the search of premises and occupier is not deprived of protection because he was a victim rather than a suspect.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Court of Appeal confirms exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies in Canadian pipeline dispute

On 10 June 2022 the Court of Appeal upheld an anti-suit injunction granted in favour of insurers by Mr Justice Jacobs in September 2021 restraining proceedings from being brought in Canada and enforcing the exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies.



Payment Fraud landscape shaped by technology in 2021

Payment systems across Europe are under increased pressure to mitigate fraud risks and defend against persistent attacks from enablers using ever more sophisticated and malicious viruses and malware.


Legal updates

Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm)

This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.


Legal updates

Assessing the scope of employers liability – Chell v Tarmac

These were the opening remarks of Mr Justice Martin Spencer when handing down his Judgment in the recent case of Andrew Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Limited [2020] EWHC 2613, the latest in a series of appeals dealing with the scope of vicarious liability.


The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up