Application was made for damages after a wrongful delay in the prisoner’s release.
Held: Collins J urged practitioners not to pursue actions which are ‘not likely to achieve any sensible redress’. Claims in damages cannot be brought unless it is demonstrated that the claimant would have been released by a decision taken at a hearing which had occurred when it should have done, as opposed to when in fact it did.
References: [2009] EWHC 1638 (Admin)
Links: Bailii
Judges: Collins J
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:
- Cited – Degainis, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice Admn 3-Feb-2010 (, [2010] EWHC 137 (Admin))
The claimant sought damages. He had been released from prison and recalled, but the review of his continued detention was not undertaken as it should have been. The defendant said that the acknowledgement and apology were sufficient just . . - Cited – Chater, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another Admn 2-Aug-2010 (, [2010] EWHC 2257 (Admin))
The claimant sought judicial review of his treatment after recall to prison from licence. He had a history of the sexual abuse of children. A police surveillance report had been rejected by the Parole Board, but they had nevertheless continued his . . - At First Instance Court – Betteridge v The United Kingdom ECHR 29-Jan-2013 (1497/10 – HEJUD, , [2013] ECHR 97)
The applicant prisoner complained of a delay in his release pending a review by the Parole Board.
Held: The violation of article 5(4) resulted from a delay in the holding of a review by the Board following the expiry of an IPP prisoner’s . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 22 September 2020; Ref: scu.347715
