The UK Supreme Court is considering a significant appeal over whether a domestic abuse survivor can bring civil claims against Sussex Police and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) after her confidential home address was disclosed to her alleged abuser.

The case, The Chief Constable of Sussex Police and another v XGY, raises important questions about the scope of legal immunity enjoyed by prosecutors and police officers in connection with criminal proceedings.

Labour MP and former safeguarding minister Jess Phillips has called on the Supreme Court to overturn the Court of Appeal's decision, warning that an expansive interpretation of immunity could undermine accountability where public authorities fail victims of domestic and sexual violence.

Survivor's Address Disclosed During Court Proceedings

The appellant, identified only as XGY to protect her identity, had provided Sussex Police with her new home address after allegedly suffering serious abuse by her former partner.

Her former partner had been accused of rape and of threatening to kill her and throw acid at her. During subsequent proceedings, a CPS advocate sought a bail condition preventing him from entering the road where XGY was living.

However, Sussex Police had reportedly included XGY's address in the information provided to prosecutors without marking it as confidential. The address was then disclosed by a CPS lawyer during the magistrates' court hearing.

XGY subsequently moved from the property because of the disclosure. She later sought to pursue legal action against Sussex Police and the CPS, including claims under the Human Rights Act 1998 and Data Protection Act 2018.

Dispute Over 'Core Immunity'

Central to the case is the common-law principle of "core immunity", which traditionally protects participants in judicial proceedings, including witnesses and advocates, from certain civil claims arising from what they say or do in court.

The Court of Appeal ruled that XGY could not pursue her claims, holding that the immunity extended beyond what occurred inside the courtroom to encompass related police activity in preparing material for prosecutors.

The Supreme Court must now determine, among other issues, whether a CPS advocate is immune from liability for disclosing a vulnerable person's confidential address during a bail hearing and whether that immunity extends to police officers who placed the address in the prosecution file.

The court will also consider whether any common-law immunity can prevent claims brought under the Human Rights Act 1998 and Data Protection Act 2018.

Labour MP Jess Phillips Warns of Wider Consequences for Abuse Victims

MP Phillips has expressed concern that allowing the Court of Appeal's interpretation to stand could have wider consequences for victims seeking to hold police and prosecutors accountable for serious failures.

She argued that civil litigation has played an important role in exposing institutional shortcomings and bringing about reforms in the treatment of victims of domestic abuse and sexual violence.

Her concerns extend beyond the availability of financial compensation. Civil claims, she argued, can provide an important accountability mechanism where failures within the criminal justice system have placed vulnerable people at risk.

Phillips, together with MPs David Davis and Andrew Mitchell, has also backed a proposed legislative amendment intended to address the effect of the Court of Appeal's ruling if it is ultimately upheld.

Supreme Court to Determine Limits of Immunity

The appeal places two significant legal interests in tension: the longstanding protection afforded to participants in judicial proceedings and the ability of individuals to obtain redress when alleged failures by public authorities expose them to harm.

For domestic abuse survivors in particular, the case also raises questions about whether victims can safely disclose sensitive information to law enforcement agencies with confidence that it will be appropriately protected.

The Supreme Court's decision could therefore clarify not only the boundaries of courtroom immunity but also the extent to which police and prosecuting authorities may face civil liability for the mishandling of confidential information connected with criminal proceedings.

The appeal was heard by the Supreme Court on 21 and 22 October 2026. Judgment is awaited.

Source: The Guardian