Phillip v Preville et Al
| Jurisdiction | St Lucia |
| Judge | Wills, J. |
| Judgment Date | 19 January 1960 |
| Neutral Citation | LC 1960 HC 1 |
| Docket Number | No. 47 of 1959 |
| Court | High Court (Saint Lucia) |
| Date | 19 January 1960 |
Supreme Court of the Windward and Leeward Islands. (Civil Jurisdiction).
Wills, J.
No. 47 of 1959
M. M. Mason for plaintiff
E. H. Giraudy for defendant No. 1.
V. A. Cooper for defendants No. 2 and 3.
Tort - Unlawful arrest
Facts: The plaintiff alleged that police officers pretended that they had a warranty for his arrest for the non-payment of a fine of $15.00 imposed on him by a magistrate. The appellant alleged that he had paid the fine. The plaintiff's claim was classified as a delict under Article 985 of Cap. 242. The issue was whether the plaintiff's arrest was lawful
Held: The evidence showed that the defendants had no warrant when they arrested the plaintiff. They had no legal authority to take the plaintiff into custody and detain him at the police station. Judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $500.00
The plaintiff, Lennox Phillip, claimed to recover damages for false imprisonment from three defendants, namely: — Olney Preville, Police Constable No. 12, Clement Jnr. Paul, Police Constable No. 206 and Auguste Pierre, Sergeant of Police, No. 45, who was in charge of Port Police Station on the night of 14 th February 1959, between the hours of 11.30 p.m. and 2.00 a.m. on 15 th February 1959.
The plaintiff, by his declaration, alleged that on the 14 th February 1959, at about 10.00 p.m. he was walking along the ChaussÉe Road, Castries, when the defendants Preville and Jnr. Paul falsely pretended that they had a warrant for his arrest for the non-payment of a fine of ($15.00) fifteen dollars imposed on him by the Magistrate of the 1 st District Court on the 15 th November 1958; the said defendants arrested him and he was taken through the streets to the Port Police Station, Castries, there he was detained by defendant Sergeant Pierre until 2.30 a.m. when he was released.
The plaintiff further alleged that the said fine of fifteen dollars ($15.00) was imposed on him in November 1958 and paid into court on the 10 th December 1958, and that he so informed the defendants at the time he was arrested and detained.
In English Law the plaintiff's claim is classified as a Tort, being a trespass to the person a false imprisonment.
Under the Civil Code of St. Lucia, the plaintiff's claim is classified as a Delict and the night of action is provided by Article 985 of Chapter 242 (Vol. IV of the Laws of St. Lucia) page 438. “Every person capable of discerning right from wrong is responsible for damage caused either by his act, imprudence, neglect, or want of skill and he is not relievable from obligations thus arising”.
This action raises questions of some importance as regards the right of arrest by a Constable on a Warrant for the payment of a fine when such Constable is not in possession of the warrant at the time of arrest.
A Police Constable derives his authority to arrest either by virtue of his office or under special authority given by a Warrant addressed to him or the Police or Constables in general.
The powers and duty of the Police are clearly defined in ss. 11 and 12 of Chapter 137 - Vol. 2 of the Laws of St. Lucia:
Section 11 - inter alia – “Every member of the Police Force shall have…all such authorities, privileges,…as any constable…has…either by the common law of England or…”
Section 12 - inter alia - “It shall be the duty of the Police Force to take lawful measures for - …executing…warrants…issued by…magistrates…”
The word “lawful” in the section must be observed and strictly complied with.
Section 25 of Chapter 137 gives the Police statutory immunity from any action brought in respect of any act done in obedience to any warrant.
By the Common Law of England a Police Constable is protected when he executes a warrant valid on the face of it and issued by a person who has jurisdiction to issue it, and s. 11 cited before clothes a police constable in St Lucia with the same privileges, which a constable in England has under the Common Law.
There is an important distinction between a warrant of commitment for the non-payment of a fine and a warrant of apprehension for a summary or indictable offence or crime.
In the latter, the constable must bring the prisoner before the Magistrate as soon as practicable to be dealt with according to Law, while in the former the prisoner must be delivered as soon as practicable to the gaoler of the prison.
The relevant law as to the former is as follows: - “In every case where an order is made by a Magistrate against a person for the payment of a sum of money and such person is liable to imprisonment with or without hard labour, if such person is in default of paying the fine the Magistrate shall issue a warrant of commitment under his hand requiring the Police or other constable to whom the same is directed to take and convey such person to prison and deliver him to the gaoler, there to be imprisoned for such time as may be directed unless the fine, costs and other charges shall be sooner paid”.
See s. 1379 et seq. - Ch: 250, Vol. 5, Criminal Code of St. Lucia. The question to be answered is whether the defendants, each and all of them, did arrest or take any part in the arrest and detention of the plaintiff on the 14 th February 1959, and if they did, whether such arrest was lawful.
Vol. 9, Halsbury Laws - 2 nd Edition-paragraph 111 - “Arrest consists of the actual seizure or touching of a person's body with a view to his detention. The mere pronouncing of words of arrest is not an arrest, unless the person sought to be arrested submits to the process and goes with the arresting officer”.
The plaintiff in his evidence stated that he was arrested by the defendants - constables Preville and Jnr. Paul - on the public highway.
The following is the evidence of the arrest:
“I met the defendant Preville; this defendant touched me on my right shoulder saying, ‘Mr. Gentleman, by the way, I have a warrant for you’ “.
“The defendant Preville said to defendant Jnr. Paul, ‘that gentleman there I have a warrant for him as he owes the...
To continue reading
Request your trial