A woman who lives in fear of her violent and aggressive ex-boyfriend has been denied the right to compensation from Hampshire Police by a top judge.

The woman, who cannot be identified, claimed the force breached her and her mother's human rights by not acting sooner to protect them from her former partner.

Both women sued the chief constable of Hampshire Police, Olivia Pinkney, at London's High Court alleging the force failed to take adequate steps to protect them from their tormentor.

But their case was dismissed by Mr Justice Lavender, who said the police investigation into the man was carried out to the necessary standard and did not amount to a breach of their human rights.

The judge said the woman was in a violent and abusive relationship until she ended it - following which her ex-boyfriend subjected her to a campaign of harrassment.

He kept her captive for three days, bombarded her with menacing phone calls, turned up at her home and workplace in a bid to intimidate her and threatened to kill her and her mother.

The two women eventually went into hiding following the catalogue of incidents, which happened in the Southampton area.

During an earlier hearing, the court heard the woman - who previously described herself as "strong" - now suffers from post traumatic stress disorder.

She contacted the police a number of times to report the man over about four months following the break up.

In one of her statements, she told officers: "I am concerned about my safety and that of my mother. I do not want any contact with him and I want him to leave me alone.

"He has been violent towards me in the past and has hit me on a couple of occasions."

Her former partner was arrested and cautioned one month after her first contact with the police about the harrassment.

But, after turning up at her workplace, he was arrested and charged with harrassment, for which he was later jailed.

Following that, neither the victim nor her mother ever saw him again and - while he did make another phone call and wrote his ex a letter in 2006, for which he received extra time in prison - he has not contacted either woman since.

The woman later received a payout from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority for the trauma she suffered.

Lawyers acting for both women argued the initial decision to issue the man with a caution, which meant he could not be remanded in custody or handed a restraining order, was a failing on the part of the Hampshire force.

They also contended that there were numerous failings in the investigation, including a failure to offer to interview the woman under guidelines for vulnerable witnesses - which they said meant she felt unable to report elements of sexual abuse in her former relationship.

Her legal team said these alleged failings amounted to a breach of the rights, enshrined in articles three and eight of the European Convention on Human Rights, to protection from "torture or inhuman and degrading treatment" and to respect for "private and family life".

However, dismissing both their claims, Mr Justice Lavender ruled that the force's investigation did not breach their human rights.

He said the caution was capable of having a "deterrent effect" on the man and that, as soon as they were told of the workplace incident, officers took action against him.

The judge added: "Having regard to all the circumstances, I am satisfied that the investigation conducted by the force in 2005 met the standard required by articles three and eight."

He also found the woman had left it "far too late" to bring her claim against the police, but said he would have found against her even if it had been in time.