Ridge v Baldwin [1964] AC 40

KEY POINTS

• It is unlawful to dismiss an officer without initially informing them of the accusations and affording them the opportunity to present their defence or explanation.

• Lord Hodson:

Persons acting in a capacity which is not on the face of it judicial but rather executive or administrative have been held by the courts to be subject to the principles of natural justice.

• The three features of natural justice are the following:

  1. the right to be heard by an unbiased tribunal

  2. the right to have notice of charges of misconduct, and

  3. the right to be heard in answer to those charges

FACTS

• Mr. Ridge was the Chief Constable of Brighton and faced dismissal by the Watch Committee in March 1958. He argued that the dismissal was invalid because he had not been given notice of the grounds for his dismissal or an opportunity to defend himself.

• Before this, he had legal issues, including an arrest and trial for conspiracy, resulting in suspension from duty. He was later indicted on a corruption charge and was acquitted. The Watch Committee dismissed him the day after his second acquittal.

• The power of dismissal was governed by the Municipal Corporations Act, 1882, which allowed suspension or dismissal of a borough constable for negligence or unfitness.

• Mr. Ridge contended that the Watch Committee should have followed regulations under the Police Act, 1919, for conditions of service, but the Respondents argued that these regulations didn't apply.

JUDGEMENT

• Appeal allowed.

COMMENTARY

• Ridge v. Baldwin is a landmark case that underscores the importance of natural justice in administrative and disciplinary actions, even in the context of public employment.

• This case has had a lasting impact on administrative law and the protection of individuals' rights in similar situations.

ORIGINAL ANALYSIS

• Defendant (the watch committee for the police) dismissed Claimant who had been acquitted at Crown Court on charges relating to conspiracy and corruption.

• The trial judge intimated Claimant had not given professional and moral leadership to other officers.

• HL held that the decision to dismiss Claimant was void because the watch committee had not observed the principles of natural justice. Claimant had not been charged nor informed of the grounds on which they proposed to proceed and had not been given a proper opportunity to present his defence.

Lord Morris

It is well established that the essential requirements of natural justice at least include that before someone is condemned he is to have an opportunity of defending himself, and in order that he may do so that he is to be made aware of the charges or allegations or suggestions which he has to meet.