The High Court has rejected a legal challenge brought against the Metropolitan Police concerning its deployment of live facial recognition (LFR) technology. The ruling, delivered on Tuesday by Lord Justice Holgate and Mrs Justice Farbey, found that the current policy for using LFR in London offers an "adequate indication" of when the technology will be employed and allows individuals to "foresee, to a degree that is reasonable," the implications of being in an area where it is active. The judges also stated that the human rights of the claimants, Shaun Thompson and Silkie Carlo, had not been breached by the technology's use.
The court's decision validates the Metropolitan Police's existing framework for deploying LFR, deeming it a lawful measure for promoting public order in a major city. This judgment arrives as the government pushes forward with plans to expand the use of facial recognition technology to police forces across England and Wales, a move that has been met with ongoing consultation and debate.
Read More: EU Court Rules Hungary's LGBTQ+ Law Breaks EU Values
The claimants, including youth worker Shaun Thompson and Silkie Carlo of the campaign group Big Brother Watch, had raised significant concerns that LFR could be applied arbitrarily or in a discriminatory manner, potentially infringing upon civil liberties. Their legal team argued that the technology, which maps unique facial features and compares them against watchlists, functions akin to a "DNA profile" and poses an unacceptable risk of misidentification. This mirrors past instances, such as the reported experience of Mr. Thompson himself being mistaken for a wanted man by the system.
Previous scrutiny of the Met's LFR practices has come from the UK's equality regulator, which in August 2025 criticized the deployment as potentially breaching human rights law, specifically citing risks to privacy, freedom of expression, and assembly. The regulator acknowledged potential policing benefits but voiced concerns over the current policy's alignment with human rights protections.
Read More: Tim Cook Steps Down as Apple CEO; John Ternus Takes Over
The Metropolitan Police have defended their use of LFR, asserting its effectiveness in apprehending criminals and those violating bail conditions, while also stating its deployment is "lawful and proportionate" and aids in keeping Londoners safe. The force has pointed to a Court of Appeal confirmation that LFR can be used under Common Law powers and highlighted the development of a policy to protect rights and privacy. Data from August 2025 indicated that LFR technology had led to 580 arrests for serious offences including rape, domestic abuse, and knife crime over the preceding 12 months.
The legal battle also touched upon the financial aspects of such challenges. In September 2025, a costs capping judgment indicated the court's expectation that campaign groups like Big Brother Watch, initiating litigation against public authorities with limited resources, should reasonably contribute further funds from their reserves.
Read More: Gauhati HC hears Pawan Khera bail plea over passport claims
The expansive rollout of LFR technology has drawn criticism from various quarters, including some London Assembly members who have accused the Met and the Home Office of rushing its expansion without a comprehensive national legal framework. Despite these objections, the Metropolitan Police have expressed confidence in the technology's legality and its role in crime prevention and detection. The ruling sets a notable precedent for future legal challenges and the broader public discussion surrounding biometric surveillance within the UK.
