KB-2024-000763 - [2025] EWHC 2791 (KB)

An allegation of professional negligence for breach of an alleged duty of care in respect of the handling of the police investigation, is made by the Claimant who also asserts an alleged failure to recognise who the police should have assisted at the incident scene, namely the Claimant and not the suspect. The Claimant asserts there was a “spectacular failure of judgement”.

The Defendant asserted that it is well established in case law (Elguzouli-Daf v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [1995] QB 335) that the police do not owe a duty of care and in any event they did call an ambulance and arrest his half-brother and interview him under caution. As such, the Defendant asserted the claim should be struck out because it is “obviously ill-founded”.

I agree with the Defendant that it is well established there is no general duty at common law giving rise to a private law claim against the police for a failure to act (Robinson v the Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [2018] AC 736). Paragraph 36 is unrecognisable as a valid cause of action. That is enough to strike it out. In passing I would also say it is hard to understand as a claim, even if such was recognised in English law, in circumstances where the initial police body worn video shows the efforts made to call an ambulance for the Claimant shortly after arrival at the incident scene, and attention only then being turned to the arrest of the suspect and his interview under caution, the case only being dropped when insufficient evidence could be gathered to substantiate it to the required threshold, such matters already having been subject to review by another court.