Man freed early ‘committed rape’ – BBC News
“A prisoner allegedly raped someone after being released early under a government scheme aimed at easing jail overcrowding, it has emerged.”
BBC News, 27th June 2008
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“A prisoner allegedly raped someone after being released early under a government scheme aimed at easing jail overcrowding, it has emerged.”
BBC News, 27th June 2008
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Reginald Wilson, currently serving life for slaughtering Teesside skin specialist, David Birkett, can ask the Parole Board to free him next month after a top judge overturned his ‘whole life’ jail tariff yesterday.”
Daily Telegraph, 17th May 2008
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“The killer of headteacher Philip Lawrence will remain in prison for several more months despite being eligible for release.”
BBC News, 21st April 2008
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
R (Black) v Secretary of State for Justice [2008] EWCA Civ 359; [2008] WLR (D) 114
“S 35(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 1991, giving the Secretary of State power to override a Parole Board recommendation for the release on parole of a prisoner serving a sentence of more than 15 years, was not compatible with art 5(4) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.”
WLR Daily, 17th April 2008
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Dunn v Parole Board [2008] EWCA Civ 374; [2008] WLR (D) 110
“In the context of CPR Pt 11, the limitation provisions within s 7(5) of the Human Rights Act 1998 provided a defence to a claim rather than going to jurisdiction, so that a failure to apply to strike out within 14 days of acknowledging service did not preclude a defendant from applying to strike out a claim on the basis of limitation.
The Court of Appeal so stated when dismissing the appeal of the claimant, Peter Dunn, from a decision of Judge Darroch, sitting in the Norwich County Court on 29 March 2007, striking out his claims against the defendant, The Parole Board, under the Human Rights Act 1998 and for false imprisonment arising out of his detention after recall to prison from that part of his sentence he was serving on licence in the community. There had been delay in the management of the case by the defendant. The grounds of appeal were that: (i) the court should have determined under CPR Pt 11 that the filing of an acknowledgment of service by the defendant precluded it from arguing the issue of limitation under s7(5) of the 1998 Act; (ii) the judge erred in finding that the claim for false imprisonment had no real prospect of success; (iii) the case was appropriate for the court to extend the period for bringing the claim under s7(5) of the 1998 Act.”
WLR Daily, 17th April 2008
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Regina (Black) v Secretary of State for Justice
Court of Appeal
“Section 35 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991, giving the Secretary of State for Justice power to block the release on licence of prisoners sentenced between 1991 and 2003 to prison terms of more than 15 years, was not compatible with article 5.4 of the European Convention on Human Rights, providing that anyone deprived of his liberty had the right to have the lawfulness of his detention decided speedily by a court.”
The Times, 18th April 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21days from the date of publication.
“A consultation on a new drive to reduce reoffending has been launched to establish how Probation Boards and Trusts will provide the most cost-effective route to help rehabilitate and punish offenders.”
Ministry of Justice, 9th April 2008
Source: www.justice.gov.uk
“Serious shortcomings in the way inmates are assessed for parole have been revealed by the National Audit Office.”
BBC News, 5th March 2008
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“The public could be at risk because of the haphazard way potentially dangerous prisoners are being assessed for release, spending watchdogs have found.”
Daily Telegraph, 5th March 2008
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
R (Walker) v Secretary of State for Justice; R (James) v Same [2008] EWCA Civ 30; [2008] WLR (D) 28
“The Secretary of State for Justice acted unlawfully in failing to provide courses which would allow prisoners serving indeterminate sentences for public protection to demonstrate to the Parole Board by the expiry of their minimum terms that it was no longer necessary for the protection of the public for them to be confined.”
WLR Daily, 5th February 2008
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“The Parole Board did not have the independence from the executive that was required for its judicial role in determining whether convicted prisoners should be released on licence.”
WLR Daily, 5th February 2008
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Regina (Walker (David)) v Secretary of State for Justice; Regina (James (Brett)) v Same
Court of Appeal
“The Secretary of State for Justice acted unlawfully in failing to let prisoners serving indeterminate sentences for public protection show the Parole Board by the expiry of their minimum terms that it was no longer necessary to confine them.”
The Times, 6th February 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
“The Parole Board’s relationship with the executive was such that it did not have the independence required when determining whether convicted prisoners should remain in prison or be released on licence.”
The Times, 5th February 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
“The justice minister, Jack Straw, suffered two embarrassing defeats in the court of appeal yesterday, which will force him to pour millions of pounds into the prison and parole system.”
The Guardian, 2nd February 2008
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A government plan to monitor offenders more closely was in tatters last night after ministers scaled back an IT programme because costs had almost doubled to £512 million.”
The Times, 9th January 2008
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
R (O’Connell) v Parole Board and another [2007] EWHC 2591 (Admin)
“A decision by the Parole Board as to whether to direct the release on licence of a prisoner serving an extended sentence under s 227 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 who had not yet finished the custodial part of the imposed term, engaged the right not to be arbitrarily detained under art 5(4) of the European Convention on Human Rights. However, art 5(4) did not require an oral hearing in every case where the question was the assessment of risk to the public, and whether or not an oral hearing was necessary would depend upon the facts.”
WLR Daily, 13th November 2007
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Relationship too close for independence of board
Queen’s Bench Divisional Court
“The Parole Board’s relationship with central government was such that it did not have sufficient independence to carry out its role of reviewing the continued detention of prisoners lawfully, as required by common law and article 5.4 of the European Convention on Human Rights.”
The Times, 18th October 2007
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
“The troubled parole system suffered another blow yesterday when the High Court ruled that hearings in which prisoners are assessed for release are not sufficiently independent of Government.”
Daily Telegraph, 9th September 2007
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
Parole Board responsibility
Regina (Gulliver) v. Parole Board
Court of Appeal
“When a prisoner who had been released on licence was recalled to prison, in deciding whether or not to order his release, the Parole Board was entitled to take into account all the circumstances, and was not confined to a review of the breach of the licence condition for which the Secretary of State for Justice had ordered his recall.”
The Times, 20th August 2007
Source: www.timesonline.co.uk
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Time Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
“The Government’s problems in handling the crisis in the prison system were compounded today when the High Court ruled that the detention of prisoners with no facilities to assess their suitability for release was ‘arbitrary, unreasonable and unlawful’.”
The Independent, 31st July 2007
Source: www.independent.co.uk