Pearce, R (On the Application Of) v Parole Board of England And Wales & Anor

Pearce, R (On the Application Of) v Parole Board of England And Wales & Anor

The Parole Board's Guidance on Allegations is lawful and consistent with established legal principles. The Board's procedure in this case was not procedurally unfair; it was entitled to consider the available information about unproven allegations and to assess the claimant's responses. There was no requirement to disregard allegations simply because they could not be fully proved, nor was there a procedural unfairness in the evidence-gathering process. The claim is dismissed.

Parties
Claimant: Dean Pearce; First Defendant: Parole Board of England and Wales; Second Defendant: Secretary of State for Justice
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Parole Board Procedure, Procedural Fairness, Standard of Proof, Consideration of Unproven Allegations, Article 5(4) ECHR
Public Law Criminal Law Human Rights Parole Board Procedure Procedural Fairness Standard of Proof Consideration of Unproven Allegations Article 5(4) ECHR

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 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dean Pearce

Claimant

Parole Board of England and Wales

First Defendant

Secretary of State for Justice

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Parole Board's procedure in considering unproven allegations was procedurally fair
  2. 2 Whether the Parole Board's Guidance on Allegations is lawful

Ratio Decidendi

The Parole Board's Guidance on Allegations is lawful and consistent with established legal principles. The Board's procedure in this case was not procedurally unfair; it was entitled to consider the available information about unproven allegations and to assess the claimant's responses. There was no requirement to disregard allegations simply because they could not be fully proved, nor was there a procedural unfairness in the evidence-gathering process. The claim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed