Dean George KC successfully prevents judicial review in Police Misconduct case

Dean George KC, instructed by Alan Ridler at Straw & Pearce Solicitors, successfully acted on behalf of an interested party, in preventing a judicial review brought by the Independent Office of Police Misconduct (the Claimant) against the Chief Constable of Somerset (the Defendant).  Dean was successful in preventing the judicial review, despite the fact that the Claimant and Defendant had prepared a consent order agreeing to it.

Dean’s client had received a final written warning at an Accelerated Misconduct Hearing (AMH).  The Claimant had applied for judicial review of the decision to refer Dean’s client for an AMH.  If successful, this would have had the effect of quashing the Chair’s decision made at that hearing to issue a final written warning.  This would potentially have enabled the Claimant to reinstate / recommence proceedings and seek to have Dean’s client dismissed for gross misconduct. 

Dean and Alan argued that there were jurisdictional reasons as to why the judicial review ought to be prevented.  The Administrative Court upheld that submission.   Accordingly, the interested party remains employed in his job and the original decision taken at the AMH stands.  Dean and Alan also challenged the validity of the proposed Consent Order.

The case additionally involved consideration of substantial procedural grounds and the proper statutory interpretation and procedures to be applied in respect of sections 51 to 54 (and other sections) of the Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020 as against Paragraph 20A (and 22 and 23) of Schedule 3 to the Police Reform Act and the interplay between the two, when referring a matter to an Accelerated Management Hearing following the referred person receiving a criminal conviction.