Supreme Court rejects police's Taser payout appeal

City of London Police will pay compensation to a man they Tasered

A City of London Police application to appeal against a ruling that it must pay £24,000 in compensation to a social worker who was Tasered by one of its officers has been refused by the Supreme Court.

Edwin Afriyie, 37, said he suffered head, back and leg injuries after falling backwards on to the ground and banging his head on a stone ledge after he was Tasered in April 2018.

Mr Afriyie said the Supreme Court's refusal to hear an appeal "marks the end of a long and difficult journey".

City of London Police said it accepts the Supreme Court ruling, and the payment of damages and costs to Mr Afriyie "will now take effect".

Edwin Afriyie (second right) with his legal team outside the Royal Courts of Justice

Mr Afriyie was stopped by police on suspicion of driving at excessive speed and was Tasered by police during the encounter on King William Street in the City of London.

He was then detained for failing to supply a sample of breath and subsequently charged with failure to provide a specimen for analysis, but was not convicted of the offence.

In 2023 Mr Afriyie brought a civil claim for compensation, and the High Court found the police's use of the Taser had been lawful and reasonable in the circumstances.

But in October 2024 the Court of Appeal ruled it was not "objectively reasonable" and damages should be awarded.

Mr Afriyie said: "The police's unwillingness to take responsibility and their decision to prolong this process speaks volumes.

"However, this outcome sets an important precedent and will hopefully pave the way for positive change."

Det Supt Carly Humphreys, head of professional standards at the City of London Police, said they would learn from the case.

She said: "In accepting the Supreme Court ruling, we also acknowledge the feelings of Mr Afriyie and the impact the incident and subsequent legal challenge will have caused him.

"We offer our commitment to Mr Afriyie and to our police officers, that we will take all learning from this case and work even harder to deliver the highest professional standards of policing."

Not 'reasonable use' of Taser

At the High Court, Judge Mrs Justice Hill found the use of the Taser was reasonable in the circumstances.

But the Court of Appeal later said: "A proper objective analysis of whether using a weapon classified as a firearm was reasonable would have led the judge to conclude that it was not.

"Her conclusion that further negotiation (by police) would have been futile did not amount to the necessary analysis of objective reasonableness of the nature and degree of force used."

Solicitor advocate Kevin Donoghue, who represented Mr Afriyie, said the case has "finally, and definitively, been resolved" in his client's favour.

He said the police must now pay Mr Afriyie compensation plus his legal costs, "which will be considerable because the police fought the case for nearly seven years".

Mr Donoghue added: "The force refused Edwin's reasonable settlement proposal, which would have ended the case a lot earlier and at less cost.

"Instead, they chose to fight it through two five-day High Court trials, a Court of Appeal hearing and two further appeals.

"Taxpayers may wonder if this was an appropriate use of scarce public resources."