The risk management of civil action litigation

Report: 7
Date: 28 April 2003
By: Commissioner

Summary

This report sets out the improved risk management system established since the loss of the Farquharson case.

This system is applied by the Detective Superintendent within the Civil Action Command, assisted by senior lawyers from the Directorate of Legal Services and senior staff from Accident Claims Branch and the Employment Tribunal Branch.

This system is an additional safeguard to the general decision making process deployed in malfeasance litigation which was presented to the committee on 25 April 2002. That process is again explained in section B below so that the committee can note any changes implemented over the last year.

The risk management system, and the decision making process are used together to ensure that the reputation of the MPS is not tarnished by inappropriately defending litigation against the Commissioner, and to ensure that suitable cases are robustly defended.

A. Recommendation

That the Committee note the new MPS Deputy Commissioner's Command Risk Management System which now operates in addition to the decision making process in malfeasance litigation.

B. Supporting information

1. The detective superintendent within the Misconduct and Civil Actions Command will normally set strategies and decide upon the settlement of claims up to a figure of £30,000. The Commander DPS has delegated financial authority up to £100,000 and the Deputy Assistant Commissioner DPS will decide upon settlements requiring authority for higher sums.

2. The merits of a case are key in decision-making but there may also be wider issues to be taken into account. Such further considerations can involve aspects like publicity, public confidence, reputation and the attitude of MPS staff. These matters are now given greater prominence through the creation of the Deputy Commissioner's Command Risk Management System, which is explained in more detail below.

3. Exceptional and significant cases continue to be reviewed weekly within the Civil Action Command and these weekly case summaries are provided to the MPA. A more comprehensive list is also provided on a quarterly basis to the MPA in accordance with the MPS/MPA Protocol on Compensation Cases dated October 2001.

4. Strong or deserving claims against the MPS are identified as soon as possible. Efforts are then made to settle these cases swiftly or to make realistic payments into court. When the decision is taken to defend a case then this is done robustly after having obtained independent Counsel's advice.

5. During November 2002 the case of Farquharson v the Commissioner was heard at Central London County Court. It is unfortunate that one of the officers involved had been disbelieved in a previous civil action. However, the MPS assessment of the merits of the case was not significantly different to that of Mr Farquharson's solicitors. The principal dispute between the parties concerned quantum. The Commissioner's expert evidence (medical and psychiatric) challenged Mr Farquharson's claim that he could never work again in any capacity and efforts had been made (albeit unsuccessfully) to settle Mr Farquharson's claim for a lower and more reasonable sum. The Commissioner paid the sum of £50,000 into court. At the trial the judge accepted the Claimant's expert opinions as to the severity of the injury and its effect on his earning capacity and rejected those put forward on behalf of the MPS. This, amongst a number of other factors contributed to a successful outcome for Mr Farquharson.

6. The consequence for the MPS resulted in a large financial award and damage to public confidence in the MPS to deal equally with all sections of the community. However, the incident leading to the claim from Mr Farquharson took place some seven years before in Lambeth and much good partnership work has since taken place upon that Borough.

7. Temporary Deputy Assistant Commissioner Hagon immediately reviewed the progress of the Farquharson case to trial. The appropriate use of Informal Resolution and other matters, are the subject of an external investigation by officers from Greater Manchester.

8. One result of that review is the introduction of a co-ordinated intelligence input to inform decision-making. Additionally, an enhanced system of managing risk has been set up. This new risk management system complements and strengthens the decision making process regarding what should be settled and what should be defended.

9. All cases progressing to a court hearing are subject to strict intelligence checks to minimise the risk of the police officers involved being criticised regarding integrity issues. The cases are then considered at a monthly meeting involving senior staff from the Civil Actions Command, Accident Claims, Employment Tribunals and senior lawyers from the Directorate of Legal Services. This is the Bronze Risk Management Committee and the Detective Superintendent Civil Actions chairs this committee.

10. The Bronze Risk Management Committee also has a role in identifying exceptional and significant cases for referral to the Silver Risk Management Committee. The Silver committee meets weekly, is chaired by the Deputy Director DPS and reviews all exceptional and significant cases and any matters scheduled for any form of judicial hearing in the forthcoming weeks. The Chair will identify any matters that require the management of a Gold Group thereby providing ACPO oversight. Issues of particular significance to the MPS, MPA and other significant stakeholders are passed to the Diamond Risk Management Committee.

11. The Director DPS will chair the Diamond Risk Management Committee with senior colleagues from across the organisation in attendance. This is the oversight group for the organisation.

12. The new Risk Management System is attached in process map format, at Appendix 1.

13. The new Director of Risk Management will be expected to review the effectiveness of this process as a priority.

C. Equality and diversity implications

This is a risk assessment system that does not affect any group or section of the community – either negatively or positively – to a greater extent than the general population. There are no equality implications in this system.

D. Financial implications

The additional financial costs that will be incurred by establishing the risk management system will be the requirement of senior managers to attend meetings not previously held, in particular the Bronze Risk Management Committee. It is expected however that by better identifying those claims where errors may have been made, monies will be saved, as the likelihood of adverse findings will be reduced.

E. Background papers

• Deputy Commissioners Command Risk Management System process map

F. Contact details

Report author: Detective Superintendent David Whitmore, MPS.

For more information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback