The Law report is a fulfilling read. Although there is no liability for the police for consequent damage even when they have been very negligent ( Hill v CC for Yorkshire, the Sutcliffe case ) there is statutory liabiility for riot. The statutory liability begins with the repealed Riot Act 1714, and is followed through the Riot Damages Act 1886. Parliament...
The Law report is a fulfilling read.
Although there is no liability for the police for consequent damage even when they have been very negligent ( Hill v CC for Yorkshire, the Sutcliffe case ) there is statutory liabiility for riot.
The statutory liability begins with the repealed Riot Act 1714,
and is followed through the Riot Damages Act 1886. Parliament has decided that the community ( now the Mayor's Office for Policing ) stand in the shoes of the trespasser in cases of Riot ( and damage) and their Lordships can see no reason to vary it.
what a strange ruling, so this will effectively come out of the public purse,
from the link
Explaining the policy behind the 1714 act some 60 years later, the well-respected chief justice, Lord Mansfield, said the idea was to encourage local residents to suppress riots.
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.