Foster, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice

Foster, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice

Given the administrative nature of HDC recall, the limited liberty interest at stake, and the clear evidence of breach, justice did not require an oral hearing before the claimant's licence for release on HDC was revoked. The decision-maker's acceptance of the Serco officer's account was rational and there was no...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Ashley Foster; Defendant: Secretary of State for Justice
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Home Detention Curfew, Recall to Prison, Procedural Fairness, Right to Oral Hearing
Criminal Law Administrative Law Prison Law Home Detention Curfew Recall to Prison Procedural Fairness Right to Oral Hearing

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ashley Foster

Claimant

Secretary of State for Justice

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether refusal to allow an oral hearing on appeal against recall from Home Detention Curfew (HDC) breached procedural fairness or legal rights.

Ratio Decidendi

Given the administrative nature of HDC recall, the limited liberty interest at stake, and the clear evidence of breach, justice did not require an oral hearing before the claimant's licence for release on HDC was revoked. The decision-maker's acceptance of the Serco officer's account was rational and there was no realistic prospect of a different outcome had an oral hearing been held.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed