Michael Barrymore, pictured at the High Court in London in November. He was not present at today’s ruling.
Michael Barrymore will only receive ‘nominal’ damages over the wrongful arrest for rape and murder he says destroyed his TV career, the Court of Appeal ruled today.
The comedian and presenter valued his claim against Essex Police at more than £2.4million, but judges;s ruled in the force’s favour over the level of compensation he should receive.
Essex Police argued that he should only get a ‘nominal’ payout – which could in theory be as little as £1 – challenging a High Court ruling made in august last year that he was entitled to ‘more than nominal’ damages.
Sir Brian Leveson, Lady Justice Hallett and Sir Ernest Ryder today allowed an appeal by the Chief Constable of Essex Police.
Announcing the decision of the court, Sir Brian declared Barrymore, who was not present at the Court of Appeal in London on Wednesday ‘is entitled to nominal damages only’.
The star launched a High Court damages action 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.
Barrymore, who brought his legal action against the police for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment under his real name Michael Ciaran Parker, puts his compensation claim at more than £2.4 million in lost earnings.
No decision has yet been made on the sum he will eventually receive as the litigation has so far centred on the preliminary issue of whether it should be nominal or substantial.
The star launched a High Court damages action after he was arrested and detained in June 2007 on suspicion of the rape and murder of 31-year-old Stuart Lubbock (pictured) in 2001
The force argued that if Barrymore is entitled to substantial damages it 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 three judges during appeal proceedings last month that 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.’
Barrymore, (pictured on November 20) brought his legal action against the police for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment under his real name Michael Ciaran Parker, puts his compensation claim at more than £2.4 million in lost earnings
Barrymore’s house in Roydon, Essex, after Mr Lubbock’s body was discovered in the swimming pool in March, 2001
Essex Police admitted the arrest was unlawful as the arresting officer did not have reasonable grounds to suspect Barrymore was guilty of any offence.
At the High Court, the force submitted Barrymore could have been lawfully arrested by another officer, meaning that only an award of nominal damages should be made, rather than the ‘substantial’ sum sought by the star.
But Mr Justice Stuart-Smith ruled the defendant, the Chief Constable, had failed to prove that if not arrested unlawfully as he was, Barrymore ‘could and would have been arrested lawfully’.
He said there was ‘information available to the police that could have provided an arresting officer with reasonable grounds for a lawful arrest’.
But there was only one designated arresting officer who had sufficient information and had been sufficiently briefed to enable her to arrest him lawfully, and she was not present.
Hugh Tomlinson QC, for Barrymore, had told the High Court judge the presenter was never charged with any offence and the Crown Prosecution Service later made it ‘crystal clear’ there was no basis for any charges.
At the Court of Appeal, Mr Tomlinson argued the High Court judge ‘should have held that the defendant had not established that any police officer had reasonable grounds for believing that it was necessary’ to arrest Barrymore.
Mr Tomlinson told the appeal judges 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.’
That was ‘very, very regrettable’, and everyone is ‘wholly sympathetic to his family’.
Mr Tomlinson said: ‘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.
In 2002, an open verdict was recorded at the inquest into his death.
Essex Police said in a statement after the ruling: ‘The suspicious circumstances in which Stuart Lubbock’s body was found in Mr Parker’s swimming pool in 2001 remain unexplained and our thoughts today are with Mr Lubbock’s family who have been through so much.
‘The investigation into Stuart’s death has not closed.
‘Time can change old loyalties and detectives are ready and waiting to hear from anyone with information that could progress the investigation.
‘Please call Essex Police on 101 or Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555.’