High Court rules temporary chief constable appointment by police and crime commissioner was unlawful

The claim in Chief Police Officers' Staff Association, R (On the Application Of) v Police, Fire and Rescue and Crime Commissioner for Staffordshire [2025] EWHC 3047 (Admin) centred on whether Parliament by the Police, Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 had impliedly authorised a Police and Crime Commissioner to appoint a temporary chief constable where there was no express power to do so and in a manner that was not prescribed by statute.

The Chief Constable of Staffordshire was suspended in August 2025.

The commissioner decided to run a recruitment process for the position, but asked the Deputy Chief Constable to "act up" in the meantime as the Chief Constable.

However, the Chief Police Officers' Staff Association issued a pre-action protocol letter questioning the process.

Permission for the judicial review claim was later granted on one ground, which argued that the commissioner had no express or implied power to appoint a temporary chief constable.

The claimant argued that the approach "was completely contrary" to the 2011 Act, which provides a statutory process for the appointment of a chief constable by the PCC.

At the High Court, the defendant accepted that there is no express reference in the Act to a temporary chief constable.

But they contended that there was power to appoint someone to such a role under Schedule 1, paragraph 14 of the Act, which provides that the Commissioner "may do anything which is calculated to facilitate, or is conducive or incidental to, the exercise of the functions of the Commissioner".

They also argued, among other things, that "extraordinary pressures" facing the PCC in securing leadership of Staffordshire police engaged the statutory duty to secure an efficient and effective police force, and that they had sought to adopt the conventional process of appointment to appoint a TCC.

Handing down his judgment, Mr Justice Jefford said that there "can be no doubt" that the commissioner sought advice from the appropriate bodies and individuals, and that the guidance he consistently received was that he could appoint a TCC.

He continued: "However, the issue is whether that advice was right and not whether it was given. Evidence that there was a common understanding of what could be done and even a related practice cannot change the position in law.

"In the course of argument, I asked on a number of occasions whether any of these bodies or people had identified the legal basis for their views, whether in writing or otherwise.

"I gained the clear impression that no basis had been identified and that there had just been an assumption that such an appointment could be made, not least because a temporary or interim chief constable had been appointed elsewhere on previous occasions."

He said that the "only indication" of legal analysis of the basis for such an appointment was in an email which referred to the Police Act 1996, adding: "Section 12(4) of the Police Act 1996, as originally enacted, did contain such a provision and section 12(5) provided that no person should be authorised to act by virtue of such designation for more than 3 months without the consent of the Secretary of State.

"However, section 12 in its entirety was repealed by the Police, Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011."

Jefford J ultimately found in favour of the claimant on ground one and that the defendant's decision to recruit and/or any forthcoming decision to appoint a temporary chief constable was unlawful.

Commenting on the judgment, Staffordshire Commissioner for Police, Fire & Rescue and Crime Ben Adams said prior to commencing the recruitment process, he sought and followed advice from national policing bodies and the Home Office.

He added: “In order to fulfil the responsibility of my Police, Fire & Crime Commissioner role in the interests of the public who elected me, I set out to identify and recruit a Temporary Chief Constable to provide stability and lead Staffordshire Police in delivering an effective, accountable and modern service for the people of Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent.

“Staffordshire Police face a busy six months, including their next HMICFRS Police Effectiveness, Efficiency and Legitimacy (PEEL) inspection, so it is vital that the good progress made in Staffordshire in recent years continues. I am confident that this will be the case under the leadership of Acting Chief Constable Rebecca Riggs.

“Whilst this judgment brings welcome clarity, I still believe the public expect to hold their elected Police & Crime Commissioners or Mayors to account for the effectiveness of their local police services and this includes appointing the officer leading the force, so I will be asking the Home Secretary to consider revising the law.”

Adam Carey