Is there no duty on the police to provide adequate policing services

regardless of the request (per /Glasbrook Brothers v Glamorgan/) ? In

other words, why is providing officers for the game considered 'special'

if there is a safety reason for them to be there?

Jason Neyers

Associate Professor of Law &

Cassels Brock LLP Faculty Fellow in Contract Law

Faculty of Law

University of Western Ontario

N6A 3K7

(519) 661-2111 x. 88435

Robert H Stevens wrote:

> Andrew Scott has drawn to my attention an interesting case on 'enrichment'

> in Greater Manchester Police v Wigan Athletic. It is here

>

>

> http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2008/1449.html

>

> Wigan Athletic Football Club is a Premiership team, who like all football

> clubs, have policing of the game provided by the local constabulary. Under

> s.25 Police Act 1996, the police can charge for 'special police' services

> where provided at another's request.

>

> The police, having provided the service for many years, state that the

> policing levels necessary were higher than in previous years. The Club

> insist that such increased policing is unnecessary but the police provide

> it anyway.

>

> Held (overturning Mann J)

> (i) There is no request for the additional policing under s 25, so no

> claim for the extra policing possible.

> (ii) No claim in unjust enrichment is possible because the Club has not

> 'freely accepted' the benefit of the additional police. They had made it

> clear they didn't think the extra police necessary.

>

> Maurice Kay LJ dissents on the basis that the Club were incontrovertibly

> benefitted by the extra police (the majority don't seem to discuss in any

> detail this alternative basis of establishing enrichment). The games

> couldn't take place without a Saftey Certificate. No Safety Certificate

> could be obtained without the policing levels determined by the Chief

> Constable. Without the extra police, no game.

>

> FWIIW, my opinion is that the case is wrong on the s 25 point, and Mann

> J's judgment was misunderstood. By requesting police for the game there

> was a request within the meaning of s 25. Dave Whelan (the owner of Wigan)

> could not have successfully insisted "I want to play the match but only

> pay for two constables as that is all that I think necessary". The level

> of policing necessary in order to obtain the Safety Certificate was not a

> matter for him but for the Chief Constable. If he thought the Chief

> Constable was wrong he could either (i) not play the game or (ii) seek

> judicial review of the decision on numbers. Once he had requested policing

> for the game, he was bound under s 25 to accept the numbers fixed by the

> Chief Constable.

>

> (cf West Yorkshire Police Authority v Reading Festival Ltd [2006] 1 WLR

> 2005 where the event could have gone ahead without the sort of policing

> provided.)

>

> That being so, no claim in unjust enrichment did, or could, arise.

>

> My opinion here is more than usually suspect as I do not support Wigan.

>

> Robert Stevens

> Professor of Commercial Law

> University College London

>

> ====

>

> This message was delivered through the Restitution Discussion Group,

>  an international internet LISTSERV devoted to all aspects of the law

>  of unjust enrichment. To subscribe, send "subscribe enrichment" in

>  the body of a message to <listserv@lists.mcgill.ca>. To unsubscribe,

>  send "signoff enrichment" to the same address. To make a posting to

>  all group members, send to <enrichment@lists.mcgill.ca>. The list is

>  run by Lionel Smith of McGill University, <lionel.smith@mcgill.ca>.

>  

====

This message was delivered through the Restitution Discussion Group,

 an international internet LISTSERV devoted to all aspects of the law

 of unjust enrichment. To subscribe, send "subscribe enrichment" in

 the body of a message to <listserv@lists.mcgill.ca>. To unsubscribe,

 send "signoff enrichment" to the same address. To make a posting to

 all group members, send to <enrichment@lists.mcgill.ca>. The list is

 run by Lionel Smith of McGill University, <lionel.smith@mcgill.ca>.