Leeds United seek £2.5m from force over matchday policing
Yorkshire Post 16/6/14
LEEDS United are seeking more than £2.5 million from West Yorkshire Police after winning an Appeal Court fight over the costs of matchday policing.
The club, which objected to having to contribute to policing costs in an “extended footprint” around its Elland Road stadium, emerged victorious from a marathon court battle against the force last year.
Leeds secured a ruling that it was only liable for the costs of officers deployed inside the ground, having successfully argued that hundreds of officers involved in crowd control around the stadium were only doing their public duty.
Today, the club’s lawyers arrived at the High Court in London, seeking to claw back £2,520,294 from the force, saying that was the amount of the policing over-charge, including interest, between 2008 and last year.
However, the force’s legal team are fighting the case every inch of the way.
Michael Beloff QC, for the club, insisted that its calculations were based on sums that were “actually charged for actual policing deployed” before the force adopted a controversial new method of totting up matchday policing costs.
However, John Beggs QC, for the Chief Constable, was equally adamant that the right way to calculate the sum due was to work out the cost of policing land not owned by the club and refund that amount.
In the Appeal Court last year, The Master of the Rolls, Lord Dyson, handing victory to the club, said football supporters “do not lose their status as members of the public when they come to a match. They are entitled to police protection when they come to a match.”
“The police have a duty to maintain law and order and to protect them and their property when they approach and leave the stadium....the policing of the extended footprint on matchdays is provided in order to maintain law and order and protect life and property in a public place.”
The High Court hearing is set to last two days.
LEEDS United are seeking more than £2.5 million from West Yorkshire Police after winning an Appeal Court fight over the costs of matchday policing.
The club, which objected to having to contribute to policing costs in an “extended footprint” around its Elland Road stadium, emerged victorious from a marathon court battle against the force last year.
Leeds secured a ruling that it was only liable for the costs of officers deployed inside the ground, having successfully argued that hundreds of officers involved in crowd control around the stadium were only doing their public duty.
Today, the club’s lawyers arrived at the High Court in London, seeking to claw back £2,520,294 from the force, saying that was the amount of the policing over-charge, including interest, between 2008 and last year.
However, the force’s legal team are fighting the case every inch of the way.
Michael Beloff QC, for the club, insisted that its calculations were based on sums that were “actually charged for actual policing deployed” before the force adopted a controversial new method of totting up matchday policing costs.
However, John Beggs QC, for the Chief Constable, was equally adamant that the right way to calculate the sum due was to work out the cost of policing land not owned by the club and refund that amount.
In the Appeal Court last year, The Master of the Rolls, Lord Dyson, handing victory to the club, said football supporters “do not lose their status as members of the public when they come to a match. They are entitled to police protection when they come to a match.”
“The police have a duty to maintain law and order and to protect them and their property when they approach and leave the stadium....the policing of the extended footprint on matchdays is provided in order to maintain law and order and protect life and property in a public place.”
The High Court hearing is set to last two days.
