Phillips, Davis and Mitchell table a bill amendment
The UK Supreme Court is scheduled to hear XGY’s case on Wednesday and Thursday, with Labour MP Jess Phillips asking the court to overturn a ruling that left a domestic abuse survivor unable to sue Sussex police and the Crown Prosecution Service.
The dispute concerns the disclosure of XGY’s address during a magistrates’ hearing where authorities sought a condition preventing her former partner from entering the road where she lived. Her former partner was accused of raping her and of threatening to kill her and throw acid on her.
A CPS lawyer disclosed XGY’s address during the hearing. Sussex police had not marked the address confidential when sending it to the CPS, and XGY moved home as a result of the disclosure.
Lawyers and witnesses traditionally have what is known as “core immunity.” In a ruling last year, the Court of Appeal said XGY could not sue Sussex police or the CPS. The appellate court said that immunity extended beyond evidential matters to a broad range of police activity, including matters outside the courtroom relating to an investigation.
Phillips, a former minister for safeguarding and violence against women and girls, said an upheld ruling would prevent police from being held accountable for failures in cases involving violence against women and girls.
“Hopefully the supreme court will see sense,” Phillips said.
She argued that civil claims have a role beyond financial compensation. Phillips said cases involving failures can lead to longer-term changes for victims of domestic abuse and sexual violence, including police failures in grooming cases where women were charged with crimes rather than helped as victims.
She said criminal law in domestic abuse cases had seen decades of failure, leading her to support civil law as a way to try to improve the systems responsible for violence against women and girls.
Phillips stressed that the Supreme Court must reach its own decision. Along with David Davis and Andrew Mitchell, she tabled an amendment to a bill that would counteract the Court of Appeal ruling if it was not overturned. She said the ruling created a precedent Parliament never intended.
Phillips also said police had improved their approach to violence against women over the previous 20 years, but described the ruling as “chilling.” She said a broad exemption from civil action would not help the police or the CPS and noted existing problems with how domestic abuse survivors perceive the police.
As examples, Phillips cited the inquiry after the Sarah Everard murder and racist and misogynistic comments filmed at the Charing Cross police station. She said these events were among the reasons women did not have faith in the police and that the loss of faith was not good for the police or for future change.
The CPS and Sussex police were approached for comment.
XGY said she continued the case because survivors needed confidence that information shared to protect them would remain confidential. She said: “More than six years later, I’m still living with the impact of what happened and the loss of the security I thought I’d finally found.”
“I’ve continued with this case because I believe survivors should be able to trust that the information they share to protect themselves will be kept confidential. If that trust is broken, there should be accountability.”