Boris Johnson Sent £75M Bill For London Riots' Sony Warehouse Fire

[Jomlett]

Appeal judges find London mayor's office, covering Met police force, liable for meeting compensation claims...
http://gu.com/p/3pd2k/tw via @guardian

[Peter Pedant]

any one got a link for the actual judgement ?

[Jomlett]

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2014/682.html

[Gromit]

The actual decision is linked to in the Guardian Report...

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2014/682.html

[Peter Pedant]

o heavens jomlett you God of Law Reports !

thx PP

[Peter Pedant]

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The statutory liability begins with the repealed Riot Act 1714,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.

[emmie]

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.

[Peter Pedant]

Mansfield was a big noise then

Somersett case - England the air is to clear for a slave to breathe - ergo no slavery at common law. 1756

R v Wilkes 1762 - " let justice be done tho the heavens fall " - fiat justicia ruant coela - no general search warrants

and 1755 - OK you lot a contract is offer acceptance and consideration - thus establishing the basis of modern contract

was a Scot and had a [ rather nice ] seat at Scone ( I think )