Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [1987] UKHL 12, [1989] AC 53 was a judicial decision of the House of Lords in relation to the claim by the mother of Jacqueline Hill (one of the last victims of Peter Sutcliffe, the "Yorkshire Ripper") against West Yorkshire Police that their negligence in failing to apprehend the killer resulted in her daughter's death.[1]
Quick Facts Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire, Court ...
Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire | |
---|---|
Court | House of Lords |
Full case name | Hill (Administratrix of the Estate of Jacqueline Hill, deceased) v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire |
Decided | 28 April 1988 |
Citation(s) | [1987] UKHL 12 [1989] AC 53 [1988] 2 All ER 238 [1988] 2 WLR 1049 |
Court membership | |
Judge(s) sitting | Lord Keith of Kinkel Lord Brandon of Oakbrook Lord Templeman Lord Oliver of Aylmerton Lord Goff of Chieveley |
Keywords | |
Duty of care |
Close
The House of Lords unanimously struck out the claim as disclosing no justiciable cause of action, upholding the decision of the judge at first instance and of the Court of Appeal.[1][2][3] The claim was struck out on the alternative bases of (i) the police owed no specific duty of care to a member of the general public, and (ii) on public policy grounds.