Three men wrongly accused of murder will be given compensation after successfully appealing against the Metropolitan Police.

Daniel Morgan, a private investigator, was found murdered with an axe stuck in his head in the car park of the Golden Lion pub in Sydenham on March 10, 1987.

Jonathan Rees, Glenn Vian and Gary Vian were prosecuted for Daniel’s murder, but The Court of Appeal has confirmed they will now receive substantial compensation damages from the Met after the trio successfully appealed against the finding of a malicious prosecution case.

The three men were arrested and charged in April 2008 before they were finally acquitted in 2012.

This came after evidence emerged suggesting the senior investigating officer, Detective Chief Superintendent David Cook, had compromised the key witnesses debriefing.

Speaking on Thursday (July 5), Nicholas Bowen QC said: “The Court of Appeal has today sent the clearest message to the Metropolitan Police that they cannot bend the rules whilst hoping to uphold the rule of law and the criminal justice system.

“Their misguided and expensive 25-year pursuit of the appellants has, sadly, not resulted in any answers for Daniel Morgan’s family.”

In a High Court trial for damages in 2017 Mr Justice Mitting concluded that Cook’s behaviour amounted to a criminal offence of perverting the course of justice. However, he ruled that three of the four claimants should not be compensated.

Mr Justice Mitting also found that Gary Eaton, the key witness, was not present at the murder scene and his account was a fabrication.

The three men appealed against the High Court's dismissal of their case and The Court of Appeals has now concluded that they will be compensated for the damages.

Lady Justice King added: "This is a case where no one has been tried or convicted of a particularly brutal murder.

"It is of importance that where serious and damaging findings of malicious prosecution and of misfeasance in public office are sought against the MPC in such a case, that the public can understand and appreciate the logic of the outcome.

"With respect to this very experienced judge, the outcome which he reached namely, that although acting corruptly DCS Cook was not also acting maliciously, may well appear to be counterintuitive to any ordinary member of the public.

"To say that DCS Cook, a prosecutor guilty of perverting the course of justice by creating false evidence against the appellants was, on account of his belief in their guilt, not acting maliciously, is rather like saying that Robin Hood was not guilty of theft.

"One understands the motivation in each case, but any seeming endorsement of such dishonest behaviour, particularly within the police force, leads, as Lord Justice McCombe puts it, to a - serious and unacceptable 'negation of the rule of law'."

The Commissioner has sought permission to appeal to the Supreme Court.