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: The Secretary of State’s appeal failed. ‘Although these provisions are, indeed, somewhat opaque and ill-drafted, their intended effect is in the last analysis quite clear. The new scheme for recalling and re-releasing prisoners was to come into immediate effect for everyone: no longer was the Parole Board to be primarily responsible for initiating a prisoner’s recall by making a recommendation under section 39(1), the Secretary of State’s power being limited by section 39(2) to urgent cases where it was impracticable to await a recommendation. Henceforth recall was to be solely for the Secretary of State. Pre-Act offenders were not, however, to be disadvantaged by the new parole regime, in particular with regard to the effective length of their sentences and the period for which they were to be at risk of recall after release on licence.’
The opportunity for scrutiny of delegated legislation by Parliament is determined by the provisions of the enabling Act. Four procedures are available: affirmative resolution procedure; negative resolution procedure; simply laying; and no parliamentary stage at all.
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood
[2007] UKHL 5, [2007] 2 AC 70, [2007] 2 All ER 737, [2007] 2 WLR 531
Bailii
Criminal Justice Act 2003 (Commencement No 8 and Transitional and Saving Provisions) Order 2005
England and Wales
Citing:
At First Instance – Stellato, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 31-Mar-2006
The prisoner sought judicial review of the decision of the Secretary of State for the Home Department to recall him to prison for breach of licence after December 27, 2005, when three quarters of his prison sentence had expired.
Held: The . .
See Also – Stellato, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 1-Dec-2006
. .
Appeal from – Stellato v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 1-Dec-2006
In 1998, the prisoner had been sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment. He had been released on licence after serving two thirds of that sentence, but then recalled on three occasions. He now sought unconditional release after serving three quarters of . .
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’. . .
Cited – Practice Direction (Custodial Sentences: Explanations) LCJ 24-Jan-1998
Courts sentencing offenders to imprisonment are now to explain the effect of remission etc in open court when sentencing; the exact form of words was set out. . .
Cited by:
Cited – HM Treasury v Ahmed and Others SC 27-Jan-2010
The claimants objected to orders made freezing their assets under the 2006 Order, after being included in the Consolidated List of suspected members of terrorist organisations.
Held: The orders could not stand. Such orders were made by the . .
Cited – HM Treasury v Ahmed and Others SC 27-Jan-2010
The claimants objected to orders made freezing their assets under the 2006 Order, after being included in the Consolidated List of suspected members of terrorist organisations.
Held: The orders could not stand. Such orders were made by the . .
Cited – Noone, Regina (on The Application of) v Governor of HMP Drake Hall and Another SC 30-Jun-2010
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 . .
See Also – Stellato v The Ministry of Justice CA 14-Dec-2010
The claimant having been released on licence from a prison sentence refused to comply with the conditions of his licence on the ground that he was entitled to be released unconditionally. He was returned to prison. The Divisional Court dismissed his . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 June 2021; Ref: scu.250027
