The claimant had been sentenced to 18 years imprisonment. He challenged the differing treatment for parole purposes of those sentenced to more than 15 years, as infringing his human rights, insofar as the decision was retained by the Home Secretary.
Held: The decision itself was clearly not irrational. As to the involvement of the Home Secretary, the court applied the four stage sequence of analysis from Michalak. (i) Does it fall within a substantive convention provisions (ii) If so, was there different treatment between the complainant other comparitors? (iii) Were the chosen comparators analogous? (iv) If so, did the difference in treatment have an objective and reasonable justification? As to 1) Legislation on early release on parole falls within Article 5(1) to engage Article 14. On 2) there was a difference, and the comparators were analagous. The difference in treatment was however justified because of the particular difficulties making decisions realting to such offenders.
The Honourable Mr Justice Hooper
Times 25-Jun-2003, CO4732/2002,  EWHC 1337 (Admin), Gazette 28-Aug-2003
European Convention on Human Rights 5 14, Criminal Justice Act 1991 35 50
England and Wales
Applied – Michalak v London Borough of Wandsworth CA 6-Mar-2002
The appellant had occupied for a long time a room in a house let by the authority. After the death of the tenant, the appellant sought, but was refused, a statutory tenancy. He claimed to be a member of the tenant’s family, and that the list of . .
Cited – Relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of languages in education in Belgium (Belgian Linguistics) No 2 ECHR 9-Feb-1967
The applicants, parents of more than 800 Francophone children, living in certain (mostly Dutch-speaking) parts of Belgium, complained that their children were denied access to an education in French.
Held: In establishing a system or regime to . .
Cited – Nasser v United Bank of Kuwait CA 11-Apr-2001
The claimant, a foreign resident, alleged that her jewels had been stolen from a deposit box while in possession of the defendants. The defendants sought security for costs.
Held: An order for security may not legitimately be based on the bare . .
Cited – Regina on the Application of Giles v Parole Board and Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 4-Jul-2002
The prisoner had been sentenced to a punitive term, and an additional protective term under the Act. After the parole board had decided that he could be released from the punitive part of the sentence, he obtained declaration that the board should . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex parte Anderson HL 25-Nov-2002
The appellant had been convicted of double murder. The judge imposed a mandatory life sentence with a minimum recommended term. The Home Secretary had later increased the minimum term under the 1997 Act. The appellant challenged that increase.
Appeal from – Clift, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 29-Apr-2004
The claimant was a prisoner serving a determinate term exceeding 15 years. He complained that the respondent’s remaining juridsiction as to his release on licence infringed his human rights.
Held: This was the sole remaining element of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights, Prisons
Updated: 16 December 2021; Ref: scu.183565