David Clarke, R (on the application of) v Parole Board for England and Wales

David Clarke, R (on the application of) v Parole Board for England and Wales

Fairness required an oral hearing because disputed behaviour reports and delay in accessing treatment pathways had a significant practical impact on the Claimant’s future management and reviews, engaging procedural justice beyond mere outcome utility.

Parties
Claimant: David Clarke; Defendant: Parole Board for England and Wales; Interested Party: Secretary of State for Justice
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed
Legal Topics
Procedural Fairness, Parole Board Hearings, Participatory Justice, Article 5(4) ECHR
Administrative Law Prison Law Human Rights Procedural Fairness Parole Board Hearings Participatory Justice 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 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Clarke

Claimant

Parole Board for England and Wales

Defendant

Secretary of State for Justice

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether fairness required an oral hearing in the Claimant’s parole review

Ratio Decidendi

Fairness required an oral hearing because disputed behaviour reports and delay in accessing treatment pathways had a significant practical impact on the Claimant’s future management and reviews, engaging procedural justice beyond mere outcome utility.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed

Orders

  • The Defendant shall hold an oral hearing in the Claimant’s case as soon as is reasonably practicable.