Police win case on Barrymore payout

COURTS: Police have won their challenge against a decision that had paved the way for the entertainer Michael Barrymore to receive substantial damages over the wrongful arrest which he says destroyed his career.

He was not present at the Court of Appeal in London yesterday to hear three judges rule in favour of the force.

POLICE HAVE won their challenge against a decision that had paved the way for the entertainer Michael Barrymore to receive substantial damages over the wrongful arrest which he says destroyed his career.

The comedian values his claim against Essex Police at more than £2.4m in lost earnings. He was not present at the Court of Appeal in London yesterday to hear three judges rule in favour of the force on the level of compensation to which he is entitled.

He had launched a High Court action for damages after he was arrested and detained in June 2007 on suspicion of the rape and murder of 31-year-old Stuart Lubbock, who was found in the swimming pool at his home in Roydon, Essex, six years earlier.

The police argued that the 66-year-old former TV presenter should only get a “nominal” payout and challenged a High Court ruling made in August last year that he was entitled to more.

Sir Brian Leveson, announcing the decision of the court, said Barrymore was “entitled to nominal damages only”. No decision has yet been made on the sum he will eventually receive.

The force had argued that awarding him substantial damages would have wide-reaching implications for the police service and other organisations facing similar claims, particularly from wealthy or famous individuals.

Lord Faulks QC, for the Chief Constable, told the appeal judges that the High Court judge, Mr Justice Stuart-Smith, had “erred” in his approach to the law.

Lord Faulks said that although the focus of the appeal was on Essex Police and Barrymore, “we should not lose sight of the fact that a young man died”.

He added: “His family, as well as their distress at this young man’s death, have never obtained a true explanation for it.”

Essex Police admitted the arrest was unlawful as the arresting officer did not have reasonable grounds to suspect Barrymore was guilty of any offence.

But the force submitted that Barrymore could have been lawfully arrested by another officer.

Mr Justice Stuart-Smith ruled that the Chief Constable had failed to prove that if not arrested unlawfully as he was, Barrymore “could and would have been arrested lawfully”.

Hugh Tomlinson QC, for Barrymore, had told the High Court judge that the star had never been charged with any offence and that the Crown Prosecution Service later made it “crystal clear” there was no basis for any charges.

Mr Tomlinson told the appeal judges that the “original incident” had a “devastating” effect on Barrymore’s career.

Then there was a highly-publicised inquest, he said, adding: “There is no doubt that something terrible happened to this young man. As to what actually happened, no-one has ever been able to find out.”

He added: “The claimant then rebuilt his career, and was rebuilding his career, and then comes this arrest, which puts him, on his case, entirely back to square one.

“He has never been able to rebuild his career since.”

Mr Lubbock’s body was found in the pool after a party where drugs and alcohol were consumed. A post-mortem examination revealed he had suffered serious anal injuries. An open verdict was recorded at his inquest.

Sir Brian said the High Court judge had been correct to conclude that there were reasonable grounds to suspect Barrymore of committing an offence and that it was necessary to arrest him. But he added that “had things been done as they should have been”, a lawful arrest would have ensued.

We should not lose sight of the fact that a young man died.

Lord Faulks QC, acting for Essex Police.