Guntrip v Parole Board of England and Wales & Anor

Guntrip v Parole Board of England and Wales & Anor

There was a breach of Article 5(4) ECHR due to avoidable delay in reviewing the claimant's detention, caused by the flawed cancellation of a scheduled review and subsequent administrative inefficiencies, warranting an award of damages. However, the refusal to grant an oral hearing in 2012 was not unlawful on the facts, there was no unlawful discrimination under Article 14, and the claimant's detention had not become arbitrary or unlawful under Article 5(1) ECHR.

Parties
Claimant: Keith Guntrip; First Defendant: Parole Board of England and Wales; Second Defendant: Secretary of State for Justice
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; declaration of breach of Article 5(4) ECHR and award of damages.
Legal Topics
Article 5 ECHR Right to Liberty, Parole Board Procedure, Imprisonment for Public Protection (ipp), Judicial Review of Administrative Action, Delay in Legal Proceedings, Discrimination Under Article 14 ECHR, Compensation for Breach of Human Rights
Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Criminal Law Administrative Law Article 5 ECHR Right to Liberty Parole Board Procedure Imprisonment for Public Protection (ipp) Judicial Review of Administrative Action +3 more

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 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Keith Guntrip

Claimant

Parole Board of England and Wales

First Defendant

Secretary of State for Justice

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal to grant an oral hearing by the Parole Board in 2012 was unlawful in light of Osborn v Parole Board
  2. 2 Whether there was a breach of Article 5(4) ECHR due to delay in reviewing the legality of detention
  3. 3 Whether the cumulative effect of delay and lack of resources rendered the claimant's detention arbitrary and unlawful under Article 5(1) ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

There was a breach of Article 5(4) ECHR due to avoidable delay in reviewing the claimant's detention, caused by the flawed cancellation of a scheduled review and subsequent administrative inefficiencies, warranting an award of damages. However, the refusal to grant an oral hearing in 2012 was not unlawful on the facts, there was no unlawful discrimination under Article 14, and the claimant's detention had not become arbitrary or unlawful under Article 5(1) ECHR.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; declaration of breach of Article 5(4) ECHR and award of damages.

Orders

  • Declaration that there was a breach of Article 5(4) ECHR due to delay in reviewing detention.
  • Award of £2,500 damages apportioned 30% to the Parole Board and 70% to the Secretary of State for Justice.