Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Pierson: CA 8 Dec 1995

The courts’ control over the exercise by the Home Secretary of his discretion on lifers was limited to procedural fairness. It was not irrational to refuse any reduction of a lifer’s minimum sentence after aggravation involving the prisoner.

Independent 12-Dec-1995, Times 08-Dec-1995
Criminal Justice Act 1991 35
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromRegina v Secretary of State for Home Department Ex Parte Pierson QBD 14-Nov-1995
The Home Secretary does not have the power to increase a mandatory lifer’s base sentence for retribution purposes. His powers to revise minimum life sentence are not absolute; and must be used fairly. . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Pierson HL 24-Jul-1997
The Home Secretary may not later extend the tariff for a lifer, after it had been set by an earlier Home Secretary, merely to satisfy needs of retribution and deterrence: ‘A power conferred by Parliament in general terms is not to be taken to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 31 December 2021; Ref: scu.87896