Gilbert, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary Of State For Justice

Gilbert, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary Of State For Justice

The absconder policy is inconsistent with the Secretary of State’s Directions to the Parole Board, which require phased release via open conditions for most indeterminate sentence prisoners; so long as the Directions remain in force, the Secretary of State cannot lawfully frustrate them by excluding prisoners from transfer to open conditions based on abscond history. The application of the policy to the Claimant was also unfair, as his case was referred to the Parole Board for recommendation and should have been considered on its merits.

Parties
Claimant: John Gilbert; Defendant: Secretary of State for Justice; Interested Party: The Parole Board of England and Wales
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim for judicial review upheld
Legal Topics
Parole Board Recommendations, Transfer to Open Conditions, Absconder Policy, Indeterminate Sentence Prisoners, Release on Temporary Licence (rotl), Secretary of State Directions, Judicial Review, Policy Inconsistency
Public Law Prison Law Administrative Law Parole Board Recommendations Transfer to Open Conditions Absconder Policy Indeterminate Sentence Prisoners Release on Temporary Licence (rotl) +3 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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Gilbert

Claimant

Secretary of State for Justice

Defendant

The Parole Board of England and Wales

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 'absconder policy' is inconsistent with Secretary of State's Directions to the Parole Board
  2. 2 Whether the absconder policy is irrational or unlawful
  3. 3 Whether the application of the policy to the Claimant was unfair and unlawful

Ratio Decidendi

The absconder policy is inconsistent with the Secretary of State’s Directions to the Parole Board, which require phased release via open conditions for most indeterminate sentence prisoners; so long as the Directions remain in force, the Secretary of State cannot lawfully frustrate them by excluding prisoners from transfer to open conditions based on abscond history. The application of the policy to the Claimant was also unfair, as his case was referred to the Parole Board for recommendation and should have been considered on its merits.

Court Disposition

Claim for judicial review upheld

Orders

  • Defendant to reconsider within 21 days his rejection of the Parole Board’s recommendation dated 14 July 2014 for Claimant’s transfer to open conditions.
  • Declaration that the Defendant’s policy excluding prisoners with abscond history from transfer to open conditions is inconsistent with Directions to the Parole Board and unlawful to that extent while Directions remain in force.