The applicants were young persons who had been detained during Her Majesty’s Pleasure after convictions for murder. The respondent appealed a finding that he was under a duty to review the tariff with a view to release even before the expiry of the tariff.
Held: The appeals were dismissed. Even though the court fixed the tariff. These applicants fell under transitional arrangements. The respondent had to keep the tariffs under review to allow for the circumstances and welfare of the prisoners as required. It was normally necessary for a criminal sentence to be determined at a public hearing, though exceptional circumstances might show that was unnecessary.
Judges:
Phillips of Worth Matravers MR, Mantell, Carnwath LJJ
Citations:
[2004] EWCA Civ 99, Times 18-Feb-2004, Gazette 11-Mar-2004, [2004] QB 1341
Links:
Statutes:
Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 82A
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Smith, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 31-Jul-2003
. .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State For The Home Department, Ex Parte Venables, Regina v Secretary of State For The Home Department, Ex Parte Thompson HL 12-Jun-1997
A sentence of detention during her majesty’s pleasure when imposed on a youth was not the same as a sentence of life imprisonment, and the Home Secretary was wrong to treat it on the same basis and to make allowance for expressions of public . .
Appeal from – Regina on the Application of Smith v The Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 3-Apr-2003
The case asked what duty the respondent had, in respect of youths sentenced to be detained during Her Majesty’s Pleasure before 30th November 2000, to review their continued detention at regular intervals. A statement said that once a tarriff had . .
Cited by:
Cited – Hammond, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 25-Nov-2004
The defendant had heard that the sentencing judge would set his sentence tarriff without an oral hearing, and would then give his decision in open court. He sought judicial review.
Held: Review was granted. The availability of a right of . .
Appeal from – Smith, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 28-Jul-2005
The applicant had, as a child been subject to detention during Her Majesty’s pleasure, the sentence being imposed before 30 November 2000. She argued that that sentence should be subject to periodic review despite the term had been fixed by the Lord . .
Appeal from – Dudson, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 28-Jul-2005
The defendant had committed a murder when aged 16, and after conviction sentenced to be detailed during Her Majesty’s Pleasure. His tarriff had been set at 18 years, reduced to 16 years after review.
Held: ‘What is at issue is the general . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Sentencing, Children, Prisons
Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.193777