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

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

The relevant part of PSO 4630 is wrong in law as it incorrectly states that the issue of an IS 91 is a statutory bar to HDC; however, the refusal to release the claimant on HDC was not unlawful as the IS 91 meant she could not be released into the community. Her continued detention was pursuant to a lawful sentence and IS 91, so there was no false imprisonment or breach of Articles 5 or 8. Permission to amend to allege a breach of Article 14 was refused.

Parties
Claimant: Diana Francis; Defendant: HMP Bronzefield; Defendant: Secretary of State for Justice; Defendant: Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Full Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed except for declaration regarding PSO 4630
Legal Topics
Home Detention Curfew, Deportation of Foreign Nationals, Judicial Review, Article 5 ECHR, Article 8 ECHR, Article 14 ECHR, False Imprisonment, Prison Service Orders
Public Law Prison Law Immigration Law Human Rights Home Detention Curfew Deportation of Foreign Nationals Judicial Review Article 5 ECHR +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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Diana Francis

Claimant

HMP Bronzefield

Defendant

Secretary of State for Justice

Defendant

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment After Full Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether PSO 4630 guidance is wrong in law regarding HDC eligibility for foreign prisoners with IS 91
  2. 2 Whether refusal to release the claimant on HDC was unlawful
  3. 3 Whether detention after HDC eligibility amounted to false imprisonment or breach of Article 5

Ratio Decidendi

The relevant part of PSO 4630 is wrong in law as it incorrectly states that the issue of an IS 91 is a statutory bar to HDC; however, the refusal to release the claimant on HDC was not unlawful as the IS 91 meant she could not be released into the community. Her continued detention was pursuant to a lawful sentence and IS 91, so there was no false imprisonment or breach of Articles 5 or 8. Permission to amend to allege a breach of Article 14 was refused.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed except for declaration regarding PSO 4630

Orders

  • Declaration that the relevant part of PSO 4630 is wrong in law