A falsely imprisoned man has been allowed to keep part of his award from a civil claim against a police force despite a court finding he told ‘barefaced lies’ about injuries suffered.

In Reynolds v Chief Constable of Kent Police, the claimant Andrew Reynolds had initially lost his entire claim after a finding that he had been fundamentally dishonest.

But on appeal, while accepting that Reynolds lied about the nature of his injuries, Mr Justice Sheldon said the claim for false imprisonment was separate to the personal injury claim and so should not be lost under fundamental dishonesty rules.

‘As a matter of principle and on the particular facts of the instant case, the false imprisonment claim was not itself “a claim for damages in respect of personal injury”,’ said the judge. ‘As a result, the trial judge was not empowered by section 57 of the 2015 act to dismiss the false imprisonment claim and thereby extinguish the claim for damages for that tort.’

Reynolds had brought proceedings in the county court in relation to his arrest in 2015 at his parents’ home. He claimed for false imprisonment based on being detained for six days and 13 hours as a result of the failure to conduct a lawful arrest. If the detention was unlawful, then the force applied to him was alleged to constitute an assault. Reynolds claimed that he suffered loss and damage, including a fractured vertebra, during his arrest.

A trial took place before Her Honour Judge Brown sitting with a jury at Canterbury County Court. The jury found that Reynolds had behaved in an aggressive manner after being arrested and had not proved he was dragged along the ground or that a police officer knelt on his neck, punched and kicked him.

The county court judge found that Reynolds lied about aspects of his arrest and he had planned to give a false account that would form the basis of a claim against the police. She dismissed the claim in full, including the £6,000 that the parties were agreed Reynolds would have been awarded in damages for  false imprisonment.

On appeal, Mr Justice Sheldon said it was open to the trial judge to find that Reynolds had told ‘barefaced lies’, given the contradiction between his account and that of the arresting officers. This went to the heart of the claim for assault but not the claim for false imprisonment.

‘The circumstances surrounding Mr Reynolds’ back injury followed, but were not caused by, the false imprisonment,’ said the judge. He asked the parties to agree on damages for false imprisonment and remitted the issue of costs.

 

This article is now closed for comment.