Oakes, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice & Ors

Oakes, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice & Ors

Once a prisoner is lawfully not found suitable for automatic release under section 255A(5), the Secretary of State must apply the broader 'protection of the public' test in section 255C(3) for any further release. The recall and continued detention of the appellant were lawful under this statutory scheme, and there is no requirement to revert to the narrower test even if the original recall information is later challenged.

Parties
Appellant: Jason Oakes; Respondents: Secretary of State for Justice and Ors
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Appeal From Administrative Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Prisoner Recall, Licence Conditions, Statutory Interpretation, Parole Board Procedure
Criminal Law Administrative Law Prisoner Recall Licence Conditions Statutory Interpretation Parole Board Procedure

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jason Oakes

Appellant

Secretary of State for Justice and Ors

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Appeal From Administrative Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Secretary of State's refusal to release the appellant following recall was unlawful under the Criminal Justice Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether the Secretary of State was required to keep the question of suitability for automatic release under review after recall
  3. 3 Interpretation of 'protection of the public' under section 255C(3) versus 'risk of serious harm' under section 255A(5)

Ratio Decidendi

Once a prisoner is lawfully not found suitable for automatic release under section 255A(5), the Secretary of State must apply the broader 'protection of the public' test in section 255C(3) for any further release. The recall and continued detention of the appellant were lawful under this statutory scheme, and there is no requirement to revert to the narrower test even if the original recall information is later challenged.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed