Powell v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
Eva acts for Jamar Powell, a black teenager, who was subjected to a terrifying stop and search involving the use of guns and tasers in September 2020.
The MPS’ response to Jamar’s complaint in December 2020 was that no further action was required in connection with the actions of the officers involved. Following a number of complex legal challenges by Eva to the police and IOPC over the past two years, disciplinary proceedings were brought against two of the officers involved. At a gross misconduct hearing in September 2024, PC Jones was found to have used excessive force during the stop for which he received a final written warning. A second officer received a written warning at a misconduct meeting in January 2025. Eva continues to act for Jamar in respect of a second complaint arising out of the mishandling of the initial complaint by the MPS.
In addition, Jamar has brought a successful claim against the Metropolitan Police Service for discrimination, false imprisonment, assault and battery, trespass to goods, and breaches of his rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 (Articles 3, 5, 8, and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights). The claim settled for a substantial sum of compensation and a written apology.
The case has been the subject of media interest, including Jamar and Eva’s participation in a Channel 4 documentary by Jermaine Jenas called ‘The truth about police stop and search’. The documentary can be viewed here.
LM v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
Eva is acting for a young black man, LM, in an issued claim in the High Court of Justice, King’s Bench Division against the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis arising predominantly out of an incident in January 2022 when he suffered life changing injuries – in that he is now effectively blind in one eye and has also suffered severe psychiatric injury – as a result of force used by an officer attached to the MPS during a stop of a car in which he was a passenger. The injuries were caused when the officer used his baton to smash the two passenger windows at the rear of the stationary car where LM was sat. LM was not arrested nor did he face any other further action following the stop.
The issued claim is for assault & battery, and / or negligence.
The events giving rise to the claim also continue to be subject to the police complaints process. The MPS has on two occasions purported to investigate the complaint. On both occasions, LM has had his request for a review of the handling and outcome of the complaint upheld by the IOPC. The IOPC has recently agreed to conduct its own independent investigation of the complaint.
KN v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
KN, aged 16, was walking with a friend in London when he was pursued by police officers and a police dog after the officers saw his friend in possession of a catapult. The Claimant was apprehended by the police dog, who bit him forcefully on his right arm and left thigh. He was subsequently handcuffed and arrested by the officers. He was taken to the police station before being taken to hospital for treatment of his injuries.
KN’s case, in summary, is that his arrest was unlawful land that the force used by the officers (via the police dog) was excessive and unreasonable, particularly in relation to the unreasonable period of delay in instructing the police dog to release KN from its grasp. KN suffered grazes/bruising to his arm and leg, as well as deep laceration to his right hand and thumb requiring a suture. Further, he has also suffered a severe psychiatric injury including an immense fear of dogs. His claim also includes a claim for past and future loss of earnings as well as a care and assistance claim.
KN has issued his claim for false imprisonment, assault & battery, negligence, and breaches of the Human Rights Act 1998 (Article 3, 8 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights).
KK, deceased
Eva acts for the family of a Polish man who died following a police restraint that lasted almost an hour and a half in hot sun during a summer heatwave in August 2020. The inquest at Norwich Coroner’s Court took place over 5 weeks at the end of 2022. Stephen Simblet KC and Fatima Jichi of Garden Court Chambers were instructed as counsel for the family.
The jury found that serious failures by police and emergency services contributed to the death. The jury noted that the police’s “approach lacked leadership” and their “decision making was inadequate”, also noted there was “a serious failure to keep him safe” which “contributed to his rapid physical deterioration during the restraint.” Further details of the jury’s conclusions are available here.
Eva then assisted the family with bringing a civil claim under the Human Rights Act 1998 against Norfolk Constabulary for breach of KK’s right to life under Article 2 of the ECHR, as well as breaches of the family’s rights under Article 2 and 8 ECHR. The claim was issued in 2023 and settled for a substantial sum in August 2024.
EF v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
Eva secured an apology and £40,000 for EF, a young black man, in a civil claim arising out of 10 stops and searches in 2020/21 by officers from the Metropolitan Police Service. In addition to compensation and an apology, the MPS also agreed to update their intelligence system with a record of substantial compensation having been paid to EF following a civil claim arising out of a number of stops and searches; it is hoped that officers who stop EF in the future will think carefully about the lawfulness of the intended search before it takes place.
During a number of the stops, EF was placed in handcuffs, and on one occasion was also subjected to a humiliating strip search at the police station. EF had brought claims for race discrimination, false imprisonment, assault and battery, harassment, trespass to his car, and breaches of the Human Rights Act 1998 (Articles 3, 5, 8, and 14 of the ECHR). Una Morris of Garden Court Chambers was instructed as counsel.
In addition to the civil claim, Eva has also assisted EF in submitting a number of successful complaints in connection with the incidents.
Lamont Roper, deceased
Eva acts for the family of Lamont Roper, a young black man who died during a police pursuit in Tottenham on 7 October 2020. Allison Munroe KC of Garden Court Chambers is instructed as counsel for the family.
An inquest into Lamont’s death was opened by HM Senior Coroner for North London and the final hearing took place between 22 and 30 November 2021. The inquest jury concluded that the cause of Lamont’s death was consistent with drowning and noted the following in their conclusions:
- Non-compliance with stop and search request
• Inadequate resources for water rescue along the canal and Lock 17
• Lack of sufficient police resources
• Lack of specialised on call rescue team [i.e. divers]
Further details are available here. The outcome of the inquest was reported by ITV News, including an interview by Ronke Phillips with Eva and Lamont’s parents, and the Evening Standard.
KL v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
Eva secured £18,000 in compensation for a black woman who brought a claim for race and sex discrimination under the Equality Act 2010, breaches of the Human Rights Act 1998 (Articles 3, 8, and 14), and trespass to land, arising out of the treatment she received from Met police officers who attended her home in response to her 999 call following a domestic violence incident. The officers ignored her allegations of assault and criminal damage, allowed the suspect to leave the premises, and failed to treat her with due respect and courtesy. When she raised the possibility that the officers’ treatment was related to her race, she was accused of playing “the race card”. Raj Desai of Matrix Chambers was instructed to act as counsel in the claim.
PQ & others
Eva acts for two black 16 year old boys and other family members in an ongoing IOPC investigation and proposed civil claim arising out of an incident involving Met officers in June 2022. The incident received national media attention following the circulation of a shocking video on social media which shows officers repeatedly punching one of the boys, including articles in the Daily Mail, The Mirror, the Independent, and the Sun.
AB & Others v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
On 3 September 2020, approximately 200 people took part in a Critical Mass Cycle Ride in London which was organised by Extinction Rebellion. As the group made their way onto Lambeth Bridge, a small number of protesters at the front caused an obstruction of the road. Police officers arrived within minutes and shortly thereafter the entire group was detained and (with a few limited exceptions) subsequently arrested on purported suspicion of obstruction of the highway.
Eva acts for 34 claimants in this matter. Their claim was issued in July 2024 for false imprisonment, assault and battery, trespass to goods and / or conversion, and breach of the Human Rights Act 1998 (Articles 5, 8, 10 and 11): https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-54021889
See further press coverage, here, and here.
CD & Others v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
Eva acts for a number of Extinction Rebellion protesters in connection with the treatment they received from police officers from the Metropolitan Police Service on 31 August 2021 in London Bridge. Footage shows officers wielding batons and throwing punches against the protesters as they attempted to gain control of the protesters’ open-top bus blocking London Bridge. It has been widely suggested that this incident marked an apparent change in the Met’s approach to the group in terms of use of force. The proposed claim is for assault and battery, misfeasance in public office, and breach of the Human Rights Act 1998 (Articles 8, 10 and 11).
The parties have agreed to engage in Alternative Dispute Resolution with a view to seeing whether the claim can be resolved without the need for formal litigation.
See here, and here, for press coverage.
Lesley Wertheimer v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
Eva acts for Lesley Wertheimer, a 70 year old legal observer who on 6 January 2024 was knocked down by an unknown police officer at a protest calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. She had been wearing a bright orange high-visibility vest with the words “legal observer” clearly marked on it at the time, and so believes that she was the victim of a deliberate act of aggression towards her as a legal observer. Her case was included as case study in the Netpol report on the policing of resistance in Britain against Israeli genocide in Palestine which was published in May 2024.
Lesley’s proposed claim against the Metropolitan Police Service is for assault and battery, misfeasance in public office, negligence, and breaches of the Human Rights Act 1998. She has also submitted a complaint about the events giving rise to her claim which is currently being investigated by the MPS.
See press coverage, here.
TH v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
Eva acted for a woman, TH, who was arrested during a protest against the police, crime, courts and sentencing bill in Manchester on 3 April 2021. One of the key concerns for those involved in such protests is the proposals within the bill to increase the powers of the police and Home Secretary to curb the right to protest.
During the course of her arrest, an officer from Greater Manchester Police pushed her with considerable force into a police van. She alleged that as a result of that force she had hit her head against the wing mirror of the van, suffered a panic attack, temporarily lost consciousness, and urinated on herself.
She brought a successful civil claim against the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police for assault and battery, and for the psychiatric injury caused by the officer’s actions.
See press coverage, here, and here.
CN v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
Eva acted for a vulnerable woman, CN, who was arrested at an Extinction Rebellion protest in Central London on 1 September 2020 on purported suspicion of being in breach of the conditions that had been imposed on the protest pursuant to section 14 of the Public Order Act 1986. CN had not been aware of the conditions and the officer did not attempt to inform her pf them prior to moving to arrest. Believing that she was being arrested unlawfully, CN sat on the floor and declined to walk with the officers to a police van in order to be transported to custody. She was carried by four officers to the van and then detained in custody until the early hours of the morning. She was subsequently informed that no further action was being taken against her.
CN brought a claim against the Metropolitan Police Service for false imprisonment, assault and battery, breaches of the Human Rights Act 1998 including her right to protest under Articles 10 and 11 ECHR, and a severe exacerbation of her pre-existing mental health conditions. The claim settled in July 2024.
JK & LM v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
In August 2020, then 68 years old JK had organised a parish picnic in the Euston area in her capacity as churchwarden of a local church. JK’s motivation for doing so was to raise awareness of an HS2 project which would involve cutting down a number of trees in the area. LM assisted in the preparation of the picnic by building a climbing frame in the shape of a honey-comb for children to play on during the picnic. Shortly after the picnic ended, both clients were arrested, purportedly on suspicion of possession of bladed articles and conspiracy to commit a public nuisance; they were detained at a police station for a number of hours and subsequently informed that no further action would be taken against them.
By way of a pre-action letter, JK and LM notified the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis of their intention to bring claims for false imprisonment, assault and battery, misfeasance in public office, trespass to goods, and breach of their rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 (Articles 5, 8, 10 and 11). Both clients have since settled their claims with the Commissioner and received apologies from the Metropolitan Police, as well as confirmation that their seized property will be returned to them. Eva Roszykiewicz acted for both clients.
