Reese v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2000] 1 AC 360
The availability of a claim in negligence against the police in respect of a prisoner who commits suicide whilst in police custody
Facts
The executrix of a deceased estate brought an action against the police following the death of a prisoner in custody. The prisoner was a known suicide risk and it was held at first instance, because the police were aware of the risk that they owed a duty of care to the prisoner in this respect. It was also accepted that the duty had been breached by the police when they left the hatch open in the cell door on the basis that they ought to have been aware that the prisoner may tie his shirt to it and hang himself. Despite this, the trial judge found that a claim in negligence could not succeed because the defences of non fit injuria and novus actus interveniens applied. The judgment was overturned on appeal on the basis that the defences could not apply where the act complained of itself gave rise to the defence. The Commissioner appealed.
Issues
Whether a concerted act of suicide could break the chain of causation between a negligent act and death.
Decision/Outcome
It was held that suicide in the circumstances of this case would not break the chain of causation. In circumstances where a person was of sound mind, they could be expected to be responsible for their own actions. However, where the police were aware of a particular risk, it would create an absurd result if a failure to protect against the risk created a defence to the claim where the death was caused by the known risk. It was held however, that both the police and the prisoner were negligent and therefore damages reflected the prisoner’s contributory negligence.
Updated 20 March 2026
This article contains a significant error in the case citation. The correct case name is Reeves v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2000] 1 AC 360, not Reese. This is a factual inaccuracy that could cause confusion when students attempt to locate the case.
On the substantive law, the article broadly and accurately describes the House of Lords’ decision in Reeves. The key holdings — that the voluntary act of suicide by a person of sound mind did not automatically break the chain of causation where the very risk guarded against was the prisoner’s self-harm, and that contributory negligence applied to reduce damages — remain good law. The Law Lords’ reasoning on volenti non fit injuria and novus actus interveniens in this context has not been overturned.
Students should note that the duty of care owed by police to those in custody in relation to known suicide risks has been further considered in subsequent cases and human rights jurisprudence (particularly under Article 2 ECHR), and the interplay between negligence claims and Article 2 operational duty claims is now an important area of law alongside this common law authority. However, Reeves itself remains a leading and frequently cited case on causation and contributory negligence in this context.
