The court had to decide the extent to which the Parole Board could rely on hearsay evidence in a case in which a discretionary life prisoner’s licence had been revoked. The evidence was crucial to the issue of risk.
Held: (majority) The Board’s decision which had relied upon the hearsay evidnce was upheld. Kennedy LJ: What the Parole Board must do is to decide in the light of all the relevant material placed before it whether, in the terms of section 28(6)(b) of the 1997 Act, it ‘is satisfied that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public that the prisoner should be confined’.
Judges:
Lord Justice Clarke Lord Justice Kennedy Lord Justice Wall
Citations:
[2004] EWCA Civ 80
Links:
Statutes:
Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 28(6)(b)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Brooks, Regina (on the Application Of) v Parole Board and Another Admn 11-Jun-2003
. .
Cited by:
Appealed to – Brooks, Regina (on the Application Of) v Parole Board and Another Admn 11-Jun-2003
. .
Cited – Roberts v Parole Board CA 28-Jul-2004
The discretionary life-prisoner faced a parole board. The Secretary of State wished to present evidence, but wanted the witness to be protected. The Parole Board appointed special counsel to hear the evidence on behalf of the prisoner on terms that . .
Cited – Regina (DJ) v Mental Health Review Tribunal; Regina (AN) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region) Admn 11-Apr-2005
Each applicant sought judicial review of the refusal of the tribunal to authorise their release from detention under the 1983 Act, saying that the Tribunal had accepted evidence to a lower standard of proof.
Held: Neither the criminal standard . .
Cited – Regina (Broadbent) v Parole Board QBD 27-May-2005
The claimant was a long term prisoner released on licence. He had been stopped and charged with conspiracy to supply a controlled drug. He pleaded not guitly. He challenged revocation of his licence.
Held: A charge alone was not sufficient to . .
Cited – McClean, Re HL 7-Jul-2005
The appellant was serving a life sentence for terrorist offences. He complained that he should have been released under the 1998 Act. It was said he would be a danger to the public if released. On pre-release home leave he was involved in a . .
Cited – AN, Regina (on the Application of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region) and others CA 21-Dec-2005
The appellant was detained under section 37 of the 1983 Act as a mental patient with a restriction under section 41. He sought his release.
Held: The standard of proof in such applications remained the balance of probabilities, but that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Prisons
Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.193448