Chester, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice & Anor

Chester, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice & Anor

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 a fundamental departure from the legislative scheme and is not permitted. A declaration of incompatibility is unnecessary and inappropriate as one already exists, and the Government is acting to remedy the incompatibility. The court will not interfere with or pre-empt Parliamentary consideration of proposed legislation, especially on matters of sensitive social policy where there is no clear requirement under the ECHR to enfranchise post-tariff lifers.

Parties
Claimant: The Queen on the Application of 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 / Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Prisoners' Voting Rights, Compatibility of UK Law With ECHR, Margin of Appreciation, Declarations of Incompatibility, Judicial Deference to Parliament
Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Election Law Prisoners' Voting Rights Compatibility of UK Law With ECHR Margin of Appreciation Declarations of Incompatibility Judicial Deference to Parliament

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 31 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen on the Application of Chester

Claimant

Secretary of State for Justice

First Defendant

Wakefield Metropolitan District Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / 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 as regards post-tariff lifers' voting rights
  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 should intervene in the legislative process regarding proposed changes to prisoners' voting rights

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 a fundamental departure from the legislative scheme and is not permitted. A declaration of incompatibility is unnecessary and inappropriate as one already exists, and the Government is acting to remedy the incompatibility. The court will not interfere with or pre-empt Parliamentary consideration of proposed legislation, especially on matters of sensitive social policy where there is no clear requirement under the ECHR to enfranchise post-tariff lifers.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim dismissed in its entirety
  • Claimant to pay the reasonable costs of the First and Second Defendants, subject to legal aid provisions