Essex Police lose High Court fight over Lord Hanningfield arrest

The former leader of Essex County Council who was convicted of expenses fraud has won £3,500 in damages from Essex Police at the High Court over an alleged wrongful arrest.

Lord Hanningfield (above), sued for unlawful arrest and detainment after being taken into custody over suspected credit card fraud on September 14, 2011. The charges were later dropped.

Having already served nine weeks of a nine months sentence for expenses fraud, Lord Hanningfield argued that officers arriving at 6.45am had failed to obtain a search warrant.

Presiding over the case, Lord Justice Eady decided the claim by Essex Police officers that they had been invited in was unlikely and dismissed witness statements from Essex County Council claiming that Lord Hanningfield was “a bully” with a short temper as invalid reasons to arrest without a warrant.

“It is appropriate to recall, in this context, that Lord Hanningfield was about to pass his 72nd birthday and that he was suffering from depression and high blood pressure,” he said in judgement.

“He was relieved to have been allowed home a few days earlier and was thinking about trying to piece his life together. The prospect of his attempting to “bully” any of the police officers visiting his home that morning does seem somewhat remote. 

“On the other hand, I believe that the suggestion put forward was that, when challenged with his council expenses claims as leader, he might fly into a temper and become uncooperative.”

Lord Justice Eady also pointed to the lack of bail conditions following the interview at Braintree Police Station as indicating there was no serious concern Lord Hanningfield may seek to conceal evidence or collude with his co-accused, and hence there was no “rational basis for rejecting alternative procedures”.

“Summary arrest was never going to have any impact on “the prompt and effective investigation” of Lord Hanningfield’s credit card expenses,” he said.

“There were simply no solid grounds to suppose that he would suddenly start to hide or destroy evidence, or that he would make inappropriate contacts. There was only the theoretical possibility that he might do so. 

“I can, therefore, see no justification for by-passing all the usual statutory safeguards involved in obtaining a warrant.”

Lord Hanningfield said he would have acquiesced with police requests to discuss the expenses issues and had always cooperated with officers.

He said: “I think the police do need to be careful. I felt it extraordinary that I was treated in this way.”

An Essex Police spokesperson said: “Essex Police is disappointed with today’s judgement and are considering the merits of appealing the decision.

“We note that the court accepted that officers had acted in good faith and that they had honestly believed the arrest was necessary. The decision to arrest is never taken lightly and we recognise the right of individuals to challenge such decisions before the courts.”