Chester, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice & Anor [2009] EWHC 2923 (Admin) (28 October 2009)

Chester, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice & Anor [2009] EWHC 2923 (Admin) (28 October 2009)

The court refused to grant any relief. It held that reading down s8 of the 2002 Act to enfranchise post-tariff lifers or all prisoners would be an impermissible judicial amendment of a fundamental feature of the legislation and is not available under s3 HRA or EU law. A declaration of incompatibility in respect of s3 of the 1983 Act is unnecessary and inappropriate as one has already been made in Smith v Scott, which binds the Government and is being acted upon. A declaration in respect of s8 of the 2002 Act is also inappropriate as it is parasitic on s3 and there is no current European election. The court further held that it cannot and should not pre-emptively declare that any future...

Citation
[2009] EWHC 2923 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Chester; First Defendant: Secretary of State for Justice; Second Defendant: Wakefield Metropolitan District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Prisoners' Voting Rights, Article 3 Protocol 1 ECHR, Representation of the People Act 1983, European Parliamentary Elections Act 2002, Declaration of Incompatibility, Margin of Appreciation, Parliamentary Sovereignty, Remedies Under Human Rights Act 1998
Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Election Law European Union Law Prisoners' Voting Rights Article 3 Protocol 1 ECHR Representation of the People Act 1983 European Parliamentary Elections Act 2002 +4 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 27 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chester

Claimant

Secretary of State for Justice

First Defendant

Wakefield Metropolitan District Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s3 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 and s8 of the European Parliamentary Elections Act 2002 are incompatible with the ECHR and/or EU law as regards post-tariff lifers
  2. 2 Whether the court should grant a declaration of incompatibility or read down the legislation to allow post-tariff lifers to vote
  3. 3 Whether the court can or should pre-emptively declare that future legislation must enfranchise post-tariff lifers

Ratio Decidendi

The court refused to grant any relief. It held that reading down s8 of the 2002 Act to enfranchise post-tariff lifers or all prisoners would be an impermissible judicial amendment of a fundamental feature of the legislation and is not available under s3 HRA or EU law. A declaration of incompatibility in respect of s3 of the 1983 Act is unnecessary and inappropriate as one has already been made in Smith v Scott, which binds the Government and is being acted upon. A declaration in respect of s8 of the 2002 Act is also inappropriate as it is parasitic on s3 and there is no current European election. The court further held that it cannot and should not pre-emptively declare that any future...

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed