The prisoner had been sentenced to consecutive terms of imprisonment, one for less, and one for more than 12 months. She disputed the date on which she should be released to home detention under curfew under the Guidance issued by the Secretary of State explaining how the release date should be calculated where longest sentence as subject to the 2003 Act, and the shorter sentences subject to the 1991 Act. The CA had ruled the policy lawful.
Held: The appeal succeeded and the policy was declared unlawful. The 2003 Act brought in provisions which had not been implemented, and the Transitional Order applied. However the 2005 Order allowed the possibility of capricious results, and the result was not that intended by Parliament. Paragraph 14 of the 2005 Order was intended to apply only where all the sentences were less than twelve months, but this left a gap for the situation where one or more was not. It was intended that sections 262(3) and 264(2) and (3) should apply. The guidance incorrectly inferred that an order that two sentences are to be consecutive directs that the second should start when the custodial part of the first ends has no basis in law and converts a sentence that is directed to be consecutive into a sentence which is in part concurrent.
Lord Phillips, President, Lord Saville, Lord Brown, Lord Mance, Lord Judge
[2010] UKSC 30, [2010] WLR (D) 164, [2010] 1 WLR 1743, [2010] 4 All ER 463, [2010] 1 WLR 1743
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary
Criminal Justice Act 1991, Criminal Justice Act 2003 181 244, Crime and Disorder Act 1998 101, Criminal Justice Act 2003 (Commencement No 8 and Transitional and Savings Provisions) Order 2005 14
England and Wales
Citing:
At First Instance – Noone, Regina (on the Application of) v HMP Drake Hall and Another Admn 31-Jan-2008
The court considered the complications created when the schemes for providing early release of short term prisoners had not been implemented, but the new Act impacted in the previous arrangements anyway as regards those sentenced to consecutive . .
Appeal from – Noone, Regina (on the Application of) v HMP Drake Hall and Another CA 17-Oct-2008
The prisoner disputed the calculation of the date when she would become entitled to consideration for early release under a Home Detention Curfew. The Secretary of State appealed against a decision that his policy guidance was unlawful.
Held: . .
Cited – Highton, Regina (on the Application of) v Her Majesty’s Youth Offender Institute Lancaster Farms and Another Admn 17-Apr-2007
Challenge to calculation of servable sentence term. . .
Cited – Round and Dunn v Regina CACD 16-Dec-2009
Non-consolidation of sentence to debar home curfew
Each defendant had been sentenced to consecutive terms of imprisonment under the 1991 and 2003 Acts. One was above and one below twelve months. They complained that the result of trying to reconcile the statutory provisions was that they had . .
Cited – Inco Europe Ltd and Others v First Choice Distributors (A Firm) and Others HL 10-Mar-2000
Although the plain words of the Act would not allow an appeal to the Court of Appeal under the circumstances presently applying, it was clear that the parliamentary draftsman had failed to achieve what he had wanted to, that the omission was in . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 5 of 2002) HL 14-Oct-2004
The Attorney General sought the correct interpretation of section 17 where a court was asked as to whether evidence obtained from a telephone tapping had been taken from a public or private network. A chief constable suspected that the defendants, . .
Cited – Stellato, Regina (on the Application of)v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 28-Feb-2007
The prisoner had served part of his ten year sentence, been released on licence and then recalled. He complained that the new parole system under which he had then to apply was invalid, having been made Parliament by negative resolution.
Held: . .
Cited – Buddington v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 27-Mar-2006
The court considered the validity of of the claimant’s recall to prison. The words ‘falls to be released’ in paragraph 23 mean ‘is entitled to be released’ or ‘is released’. The author of the Order may have been suffering from ‘Homeric exhaustion’. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Sentencing, Prisons
Leading Case
Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.420018