Hudson v NSW State Parole Authority [2010] NSWSC 287

Hudson v NSW State Parole Authority [2010] NSWSC 287

The applicant did not establish that the information on which the State Parole Authority relied was false, misleading, or irrelevant in substance. Accordingly, the application for a direction under s 155 was dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: Thomas William Hudson; Respondent: NSW State Parole Authority
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Application Under S 155 Crimes (administration of Sentences) Act 1999 / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Parole, Revocation of Parole, Judicial Review of Parole Decision
Criminal Law Parole Revocation of Parole Judicial Review of Parole Decision

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas William Hudson

Applicant

NSW State Parole Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under S 155 Crimes (administration of Sentences) Act 1999 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the NSW State Parole Authority's decision to revoke parole was based on false, misleading, or irrelevant information for the purposes of s 155 Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant did not establish that the information on which the State Parole Authority relied was false, misleading, or irrelevant in substance. Accordingly, the application for a direction under s 155 was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed