Brett Stuart Radford v Parole Board [2002] NSWCCA 70

Brett Stuart Radford v Parole Board [2002] NSWCCA 70

The evidence does not establish that the Parole Board's decision was based on false, misleading or irrelevant information. The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence that would justify giving a direction to the Board. The application is therefore refused.

Parties
Applicant: Brett Stuart Radford; Respondent: Parole Board
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 March 2002
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 155 of the Crimes (administration of Sentences) Act 1999 / Hearing and Decision of Application for Direction to the Parole Board
Outcome
Application refused.
Legal Topics
Revocation of Parole, Review by Parole Board, False, Misleading or Irrelevant Information
Criminal Law Parole Revocation of Parole Review by Parole Board False, Misleading or Irrelevant Information

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brett Stuart Radford

Applicant

Parole Board

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under S 155 of the Crimes (administration of Sentences) Act 1999 / Hearing and Decision of Application for Direction to the Parole Board

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the decision of the Parole Board not to release the applicant on parole was based on false, misleading or irrelevant information

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence does not establish that the Parole Board's decision was based on false, misleading or irrelevant information. The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence that would justify giving a direction to the Board. The application is therefore refused.

Court Disposition

Application refused.

Orders

  • Application is refused.