Panton v Sherwood

• Jurisdiction: Caribbean States
• Judge: Gomes, C.J.F., Lewis and Marnan, F.JJ.
• Judgment Date: 24 November 1961
• Court: Federal Supreme Court (West Indies)
• Date: 24 November 1961

(F.S.C.

Gomes, C.J.F., Lewis and Marnan, F.JJ.

Panton

and

Sherwood

TORT

MALICIOUS PROSECUTION-malice-police officer signing informations

The taking of legal advice does not necessarily protect a prosecutor against an allegation of malice but it is an important factor for consideration (Abrath v. North E. Ry. Co. (1886), 11 App. Cas. 247, followed; Hewlett v. Cruchley (1813), 5 Taunt. 277; 128 E.R. 696, considered; Ravenga v. Mackintosh (1824), 2 B. & C. 693; 107 E.R. 541, applied). A police officer who signs an information drafted by the Stipendiary Magistrate, who is also the legal adviser to the Government, does not act maliciously if the information contains no misstatements of fact and he signs it believing it to be his duty to do so, since he is in no position to dispute the legal opinion of the magistrate to lay the charges.

(F.S.C.

Gomes, C.J.F., Lewis and Marnan, F.JJ.

Panton

and

Sherwood

TORT

MALICIOUS PROSECUTION-malice-police officer signing informations

The taking of legal advice does not necessarily protect a prosecutor against an allegation of malice but it is an important factor for consideration (Abrath v. North E. Ry. Co. (1886), 11 App. Cas. 247, followed; Hewlett v. Cruchley (1813), 5 Taunt. 277; 128 E.R. 696, considered; Ravenga v. Mackintosh (1824), 2 B. & C. 693; 107 E.R. 541, applied). A police officer who signs an information drafted by the Stipendiary Magistrate, who is also the legal adviser to the Government, does not act maliciously if the information contains no misstatements of fact and he signs it believing it to be his duty to do so, since he is in no...