Former West End ballet dancer sues Met Police over stop-and-search injury

A former West End ballet dancer is suing Britain's Metropolitan Police for about £600,000, alleging an aggressive stop-and-search at Kennington police station in September 2016 caused permanent ankle damage that wrecked his elite dance career.

The case centers on an incident when Alexander Loxton, then 30, visited the station to retrieve a stolen motorbike helmet visor and was confronted by officers over identification. The officers demanded to see identification, and he questioned the necessity. He says the situation escalated as additional officers arrived and he was restrained, handcuffed and searched, then slammed against a wall, where an officer allegedly stomped on his left ankle, causing long-term ligament damage. He reports subsequent distress, anxiety and other soft-tissue injuries in his thumb, wrist and fingers.

In the months and years that followed, Loxton contends the injury derailed a career he believed could reach the highest levels of ballet. He is suing Met Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley for almost £600,000, arguing that the stop-and-search was unlawful and that the force used was excessive. Metropolitan Police lawyers counter that the force was necessary and proportional given Loxton’s behavior, and that liability should not rest with the police.

Loxton’s barrister, Fiona Murphy, has said the injuries were permanent and that rehabilitation did not restore his ability to perform demanding leaps, landings and direction changes required in top-tier ballet and related performances. Murphy emphasized that the incident occurred as Loxton sought to recover a stolen helmet visor and was confronted by officers who allegedly restrained him and conducted a forceful search.

Defence counsel Robert Talalay contended that Loxton behaved aggressively and refused to cooperate, which necessitated the use of force. He described Loxton as a strong young man who was actively and forcefully resisting the search, arguing that the officers acted to maintain safety and compliance. Talalay also asserted that Loxton’s career had begun to decline from January 2014 due to a combination of injury, a reluctance to work for low pay, and limited opportunities, suggesting the incident did not cause the overall downturn.

Before the incident, Loxton had trained at London’s Royal Ballet Upper School and built a career that spanned stage, screen and high-profile prestige performances. He appeared in Billy Elliot the Musical in the West End as the older Billy, performed with the Royal Ballet, and at times showcased his talents in television roles and public events, including a performance at Buckingham Palace for the late Queen’s 80th birthday. His lawyers argue that the injury not only caused physical impairment but also meaningful emotional and psychological distress, with lasting effects on his professional prospects.

The Metropolitan Police say the evidence will show that Loxton’s actions, not police conduct, led to the confrontation and subsequent injuries. They maintain that officers acted with the necessary force to control the situation and ensure safety for all involved. The case continues to unfold in Central London County Court, where both sides have presented testimony about the events of September 2016 and the impact on Loxton’s professional trajectory. The outcome will hinge on whether the court finds that the police response exceeded reasonable bounds for the circumstances or whether it was a proportionate exercise of public safety responsibilities.

Loxton’s experience has drawn attention to the complexities surrounding stop-and-search procedures, particularly when they intersect with high-skill, high-profile professions in the cultural sector. The case highlights ongoing questions about accountability, proportionality, and the long-term consequences of police encounters on individuals with demanding careers in dance and the arts. The court schedule and further evidence submissions will determine whether Loxton’s claim for compensation moves toward resolution or remains unresolved as the litigation continues.