AB, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice & Anor [2009] EWHC 2220 (Admin) (04 September 2009)

AB, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice & Anor [2009] EWHC 2220 (Admin) (04 September 2009)

The decision to keep the claimant, a legally recognised woman, in a male prison estate was not in accordance with the law and was a disproportionate interference with her Article 8 rights. The Secretary of State failed to adequately consider relevant factors, including the impact on the claimant's mental health, risk profile, and the possibility of managing her risks in the female estate. The justification based on resource implications and segregation costs was insufficient, and the approach amounted to unjustified discrimination under Article 14.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 2220 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: AB; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Justice; Second Defendant: Governor of HMP Manchester
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 September 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed
Legal Topics
Gender Recognition, Transgender Prisoners, Article 8 ECHR, Article 14 ECHR, Discrimination, Prisoner Rights
Public Law Human Rights Law Prison Law Gender Recognition Transgender Prisoners Article 8 ECHR Article 14 ECHR Discrimination +1 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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AB

Claimant

Secretary of State for Justice

First Defendant

Governor of HMP Manchester

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the decision to keep the claimant, a pre-operative transgender woman, in a male prison estate violates her rights under Article 8 ECHR (private life) and Article 14 ECHR (discrimination)
  2. 2 Whether the Secretary of State's decision is unlawful on conventional Wednesbury grounds

Ratio Decidendi

The decision to keep the claimant, a legally recognised woman, in a male prison estate was not in accordance with the law and was a disproportionate interference with her Article 8 rights. The Secretary of State failed to adequately consider relevant factors, including the impact on the claimant's mental health, risk profile, and the possibility of managing her risks in the female estate. The justification based on resource implications and segregation costs was insufficient, and the approach amounted to unjustified discrimination under Article 14.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed

Orders

  • The decision of the Secretary of State to keep the claimant in a male prison estate is quashed.
  • The Secretary of State is required to reconsider the claimant's placement in accordance with the judgment and the law.