Sim, R (on the application of) v Parole Board & Anor

Sim, R (on the application of) v Parole Board & Anor

The recall and continued detention of a prisoner during the extended licence period engages Article 5 ECHR and must be consistent with the aims of the original sentence, subject to regular review. Section 44A(4) must be read so that the Parole Board must be positively satisfied that detention is necessary. The Parole Board must focus on the risk of further sexual or violent offences. The use of hearsay evidence is permissible, and in this case, the Board's procedure was fair. The claimant's continued detention was lawful.

Parties
Claimant: William Sim; First Defendant: Parole Board; Second Defendant: Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed (relief refused on facts); declarations granted on points of principle
Legal Topics
Parole, Recall of Prisoners, Extended Sentences, Article 5 ECHR, Procedural Fairness
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Administrative Law Parole Recall of Prisoners Extended Sentences Article 5 ECHR Procedural Fairness

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 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Sim

Claimant

Parole Board

First Defendant

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the recall and continued detention of a prisoner during the extended licence period engage Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights?
  2. 2 Is section 44A(4) of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 compatible with Article 5?
  3. 3 What is the correct test for the Parole Board to apply on recall?

Ratio Decidendi

The recall and continued detention of a prisoner during the extended licence period engages Article 5 ECHR and must be consistent with the aims of the original sentence, subject to regular review. Section 44A(4) must be read so that the Parole Board must be positively satisfied that detention is necessary. The Parole Board must focus on the risk of further sexual or violent offences. The use of hearsay evidence is permissible, and in this case, the Board's procedure was fair. The claimant's continued detention was lawful.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed (relief refused on facts); declarations granted on points of principle

Orders

  • Declaration that recall and continued detention during extended licence period attracts Article 5 safeguards and must be subject to regular review compliant with Article 5(4)
  • Declaration that section 44A(4) CJA 1991 must be construed so that the Parole Board must be positively satisfied that detention is necessary