Naden v Parole Authority of New South Wales [2017] NSWSC 479
The plaintiff failed to provide sufficient affirmative evidence that the information before the Parole Authority was false, misleading, or irrelevant. The Court's jurisdiction under s155 is limited to reviewing only such matters, not the merits of the parole decision itself; application dismissed for lack of evidence as required by s155(3) of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW).
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 27 April 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Application Under S155 Crimes (administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (nsw) / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['parole Decisions' 'scope of Judicial Review' 'use of False, Misleading or Irrelevant Information' 'evidentiary Requirements for Review']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application Under S155 Crimes (administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (nsw) / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the Parole Authority relied on false, misleading, or irrelevant information in refusing parole under s155 of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW)' 'Scope and nature of review under s155']
Ratio Decidendi
The plaintiff failed to provide sufficient affirmative evidence that the information before the Parole Authority was false, misleading, or irrelevant. The Court's jurisdiction under s155 is limited to reviewing only such matters, not the merits of the parole decision itself; application dismissed for lack of evidence as required by s155(3) of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW).
Court Disposition
Application dismissed
Orders
- ['Application dismissed for insufficient evidence under s155(3) of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW)']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment