Arrest and detention

Arrest

The right to liberty is a fundamental principle of human rights. The exercise of the power of arrest is a significant interference with that right. Therefore an arrest must be lawful. The police powers of arrest are principally governed by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE 1984). To be lawful, a police arrest must be necessary by reference to the statutory powers set out in PACE 1984. PACE 1984 Code of Practice G provides additional rules and guidance on the use of these powers and are essential reading for all lawyers advising on this area of law.

The term 'arrest' is not defined in PACE 1984. The courts have held that it is an ordinary English word and whether or not a person has been arrested depends not on the legality of the arrest but on whether they have been deprived of liberty of movement. Under PACE 1984, a police officer must inform a person that they are under arrest and the reason why. A failure to do so may render the arrest unlawful.

PACE 1984 expressly preserves certain

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Corporate Crime News

FCA publishes multi-firm review findings on PSPs’ response to romance fraud

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has published its findings from a multi-firm review (MFR) examining how six UK Payment Service Providers (PSPs), including banks and payment firms, detect, prevent and respond to romance fraud. The review assessed 60 confirmed cases and considered firms’ systems, governance, investigative procedures and customer support practices.

HMRC announces first conviction for promoting tax fraud on social media

HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has announced the first conviction for encouraging tax fraud on social media platforms. Habeeb Ajaga, a 21-year-old student from London, pleaded guilty on 25 August 2025 to two counts of encouraging or assisting the commission of indictable offences, contrary to section 46 of the Serious Crime Act 2007 (SCA 2007). Ajaga used two Instagram accounts to promote criminal attacks on VAT systems. HMRC's cybercrime investigators worked with the platform to close his first account in 2022, but he later opened a second account in 2023. HMRC's Fraud Investigation Service traced the accounts to Ajaga and interviewed him under caution in September 2024. Ajaga was sentenced at Southwark Crown Court to 16 months' imprisonment, suspended for two years, on 16 October 2025.

Corporate Crime weekly highlights—16 October 2025

This week's edition of Corporate Crime weekly highlights includes analysis of the impact of the failure to prevent fraud offence on greenwashing claims and how companies now face the risk of criminal prosecution if they fail to prevent misleading claims, of how attritional disputes over disclosure shaped the SFO’s approach at a time when it was under intense scrutiny over its handling of evidence, and of the potential implications of the draft money laundering regulations for the UK financial sector and for financial services firms operating under the current regime. Also included is news of the consolidation of UK sanctions designations into a single list from January 2026, of a public consultation to shape new regulations on the sale and composition of tobacco, vape and nicotine products as part of the Tobacco and Vapes Bill, of proposed amendments to the EA’s enforcement and sanctions policy following a public consultation, and of enforcement action by the HSE, EA, NRW and the Insolvency Service. All this, and more, in this week’s Corporate Crime highlights.

Email warning provides rare sight into SFO record-keeping

Law360, London: Revelations that a Serious Fraud Office (SFO) official instructed investigators to be wary of putting their concerns about a case in email illustrates how attritional disputes over disclosure shaped the agency's approach at a time when it was under intense scrutiny over its handling of evidence.

View Corporate Crime by content type :

News