0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

Forgotten your password?

Vellino v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester

6 August 2001
The issues

Lease – Duty of care to an arrested person

The facts

The claimant, a known criminal, was arrested in September 1994. It was known to the police that he frequently evaded arrest by jumping from the window of his flat, which was on the second floor. On this occasion he jumped from a bedroom window of his flat and fractured his skull. He sued the police. The judge at first instance found as a fact that the officers had permitted the claimant to jump and that if there was a duty of care to prevent that sort of injury they had breached. But he went on however to find that under these circumstances and relying on the ex turpi doctrine (i.e. you cannot bring an action based on your wrong doing) that he did not think there was a duty of care but if there had been the police would have had a defence.

The decision

1.There was no duty on the police to prevent him hurting himself whilst trying to escape.

2. Once he had been arrested, the police had certain duties of care. It was the detention and not the arrest that gave rise to the duties in those circumstances.

3. The claimant had injured himself when he had escaped from lawful custody. At that point he was committing a crime and no longer in the immediate power of the officer.

4. N.B. Mr Justice Sedley disagreed in the dissenting judgment that taking a view that the duty was owed not to give the claimant a temptation to escape or an opportunity of doing so when there was a known risk that he would do himself real harm.

Focus on...

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.


Legal updates

Non-payment of insurance premiums during the Coronavirus pandemic

The forced closure of many businesses as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic has had a huge impact on the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Recent reports from the Office for National Statistics state that the economy was 25% smaller in April than it was in February this year.


Legal updates

Reinstatement for property damage losses – when does it apply?

The Court of Appeal has recently considered the correct test for measuring the indemnity for property damage losses and has provided useful guidance on whether an insured needs to intend to reinstate the property to its pre-loss condition.


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