Girling v Parole Board & Anor [2005] EWHC 546 (Admin) (08 April 2005)

Girling v Parole Board & Anor [2005] EWHC 546 (Admin) (08 April 2005)

The Parole Board did not err in its assessment of risk, including consideration of the claimant's medical condition, nor did it unlawfully link risk to the lack of a release plan in this case. The directions from the Home Secretary and the statutory scheme do not render the Parole Board insufficiently independent for the purposes of Article 5.4 ECHR. The claimant's application is dismissed.

Citation
[2005] EWHC 546 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Norman Girling; First Defendant: Parole Board; Second Defendant: Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Parole, Life Sentences, Judicial Review, Article 5 ECHR, Independence of Parole Board, Release Plans, Declarations of Incompatibility
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Administrative Law Parole Life Sentences Judicial Review Article 5 ECHR Independence of Parole Board +2 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 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Norman Girling

Claimant

Parole Board

First Defendant

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Parole Board failed to properly consider the claimant's medical condition as it impacts on risk to the public.
  2. 2 Whether the Parole Board unlawfully linked risk to the lack of a release plan when applying the test of risk to life and limb.
  3. 3 Whether the directions given by the Home Secretary to the Parole Board and the statutory scheme limiting access to the Parole Board are incompatible with Article 5.4 ECHR due to lack of independence.

Ratio Decidendi

The Parole Board did not err in its assessment of risk, including consideration of the claimant's medical condition, nor did it unlawfully link risk to the lack of a release plan in this case. The directions from the Home Secretary and the statutory scheme do not render the Parole Board insufficiently independent for the purposes of Article 5.4 ECHR. The claimant's application is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed