BL-2022-002117 - [2025] EWHC 2794 (Ch)

The Claimants submit that Sir Peter, Mr Smith and Ms Forton committed misfeasance in relation to the Decision Letter having confirmed during the trial that they no longer asserted misfeasance by Kirsty Evans and Karen Sherry. Misfeasance in public office is a serious allegation of bad faith and dishonesty and it must be pleaded with clarity and particularity. The pleaded case however discloses only a plea of targeted malice on the part of Sir Peter. No allegation is pleaded that Mr Smith had the relevant state of mind for either limb of the tort, and while it is asserted that both Sir Peter and Ms Forton were subjectively reckless as to the lawfulness of their actions, there is no plea that either knew or was reckless as to whether the Claimants would suffer harm. For that reason alone, the claims made against Mr Smith and Ms Forton must fail, and the only claim which can be pursued is against Sir Peter for targeted malice. In any event, Sir Peter’s evidence, which was not challenged, was that he was the decision maker and therefore the relevant public officer exercising the power which is complained of.