12/11/2025
Written by: Jessica Sutton
The Claimants, DSD and NBV, were survivors of serious sexual assault. They had each been attacked by John Worboys, known as the “Black Cab Rapist”. DSD was attacked in 2003 and NBV in 2007. While Worboys was arrested in 2007, he was not charged and continued to engage in prolific sexual offending against women.
DSD and NBV brought claims under sections 7 and 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 against the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service. They alleged that the failure of the police to effectively investigate Worboys’ crimes violated their rights under Article 3 of the ECHR and entitled them to compensation. The Claimants were successful at first instance and in the Court of Appeal. The Commissioner appealed to the Supreme Court.
Decision
Lord Kerr (with whom Lady Hale agreed) gave the leading judgment.
First, citing a line of ECtHR case law starting with MC v Bulgaria [2003] ECHR 651, Lord Kerr concluded that there was “clear and constant” recognition that the state has a duty to effectively investigate offending by state and non-state agents causing serious violence to individuals (at [48]). To render this protective right effective, victims of inhuman and degrading treatment have a right to compensation vis-à-vis the state where an investigation does not meet the standards of Article 3 (at [48]). In the minority, Lord Hughes considered that an authoritative statement from Strasbourg on third party violence was needed (Lord Hughes at [125]).
Second, serious operational failings by the police were sufficient for a claim of breach of Article 3 (at [55]–[58]). Lord Kerr noted that MC v Bulgaria clearly made separate findings in relation to systemic deficiencies versus the operational inadequacy of the police investigation (at [58]). Lord Neuberger agreed that systemic failures were not a pre-requisite for breach of Article 3 in this context (Lord Neuberger at [85]).
Third, while it was accepted that police owed no duty of care in negligence to victims of crimes by non-state agents (Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [1987] UKHL 12), the HRA position was different. The different bases for liability and public policy reasons at common law and under the HRA militated different outcomes (at [68]–[69]). In any event, only “obvious and significant shortcomings” in investigations would ground a claim under Article 3 (at [72]).
The Courts below were therefore correct to award the Claimants compensation for the “catalogue of [police] failures” in the investigation of Worboys’ offences (at [65]).
Comment
It is no exaggeration to describe DSD as groundbreaking. For the first time, a UK court decided that inhuman and degrading treatment committed by private individuals requires an effective police investigation under Article 3. The liability of Chief Constables under the HRA need not be “narrowed” to be consistent with tort (Lord Neuberger at [97]).
The principles in DSD created significant practical benefits for all victims of Article 3 breaches, and notably victims of gender-based violence. DSD clearly treats rape and most sexual offences as inhuman and degrading treatment under Article 3 (Lord Hughes at [128]). Investigatory failures need not be systemic in nature to be actionable and may be operational. Importantly, as was the case for DSD and NBV, victims subject to an ineffective investigation may gain compensation for HRA breaches alongside CICA compensation and other damages (Lord Kerr at [5] and [65]).
Naturally, the Supreme Court’s findings triggered a potentially dramatic expansion in the liability of Chief Constables for flawed criminal investigations. Concerns were raised by Lord Hughes in the minority that introducing liability into the complex domain of police work would inhibit effective law enforcement (Lord Hughes at [132]). However, Lord Kerr’s judgment rejects these arguments, and suggests that Article 3 liability would “act as an incentive to avoid those errors” (Lord Kerr at [71]). Lord Kerr’s conclusion has arguably been borne out in practice: police initiatives such as Operation Soteria have since attempted to secure more effective police investigations of sexual offences. DSD may remain an ongoing incentive for police forces to address the impact of institutional sexism and misogyny on the quality of investigations.
Matrix members
Phillippa Kaufmann KC for the Claimants.
Karon Monaghan KC, Helen Law, and Kirsten Sjøvoll for the third to sixth interveners.