Policy Considerations and Their Impact on Police Force

The impact of policy considerations regarding the police

Policy can be defined in several different ways and in different contexts. However, the policy assessed in this essay refers to factors, which affect the court’s decision making. Policy considerations are social and economic factors, which assesses the impact of a court ruling on the whole of society. Policy considerations form part of the Caparo three-stage test. Therefore, policy is used in establishing a duty of care. This essay will assess policy considerations in regard to the police force along with the impact of it. It will mainly focus upon police negligence and the decisions taken in this aspect. It will be assessing three policy considerations. Firstly, the protection of professionals,

That is the argument of the floodgates, which protects against an ineffective and occupied tort system so resources are spent where they are truly needed. In pretty much any case regarding police negligence and policy considerations, there is a risk of opening the floodgates. The biggest issue with the ‘opening of the floodgates’ is that it will mean more cases with fewer resources to deal with them. Then, cases of greater importance are pushed back and perhaps not be dealt with or dealt with in a more limited way. The case of Alexandrou is an example of the dangers of allowing claims against police negligence. In Alexandrou v Oxford the owner of shop had an alarm in case of burglary, which would direct contact the police. The alarm went off and the police failed to show up on time and the shop was robbed. There was no duty of care imposed due to lack of foreseeability and proximity. It is also a case that could be somewhat common; thereby allowing a claim in this instance would certainly open up the possibility of several similar cases. Then, by assuring the closure of the floodgates it shows the importance on examining the actual facts rather than hypothetical situations based on previous case, whose claim allowed . However, in regard to Alexandrou it should be remembered that police should not be treated, as a common onlooker and their main purpose is to protect individuals. If they

The first element to examine is that of possible benefit to society. In Swinney v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police Force , the claimant found information relating to a murder of a police officer. They reported it, but the file of the report given was stolen. The couple received violent threats after this occurred. In this case, a duty was established, it was done so in order to protect future informers, to ensure people will come forward. If no liability had been placed it would be detrimental, as informers would be less likely to come forward. This case is then distinguished into a type of negligence referred to as ‘direct action’ cases . It relates to deterrence, as well since it places this liability in order to protect informers and thereby to make sure this kind of negligence does not occur again from the police. It is a somewhat rare example where a duty of care is established. Another element of practical consideration is that of resources. The other main case for police negligence is Osman v Ferguson . In this case, a 14-year-old boy was being stalked by his schoolteacher. It came so to the point where the schoolteacher came to the claimant’s house and killed his father and injured the boy. The police had been called on several occasions, but failed to act before it went out of control. It had proximity and reasonable foreseeability however; it was