Alcock, R (on the application of) v The Parole Board

Alcock, R (on the application of) v The Parole Board

The delay in listing the claimant's parole hearing constituted a breach of Article 5(4) ECHR, but there were no very special circumstances justifying a mandatory order or prioritisation of his case over others. The Parole Board's policy was not unlawful or irrational, and no damages were warranted as the claimant had not established entitlement to release. The claim for damages was dismissed and no formal order was made on the judicial review claim.

Parties
Claimant: Benjamin Alcock; Defendant: The Parole Board
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 September 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment
Outcome
Claim for damages dismissed; no order on judicial review claim; costs ordered up to 1 July 2009.
Legal Topics
Article 5(4) ECHR, Parole Board Procedures, Judicial Review of Administrative Action, Prisoners' Rights, Damages for Breach of Rights
Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Criminal Law Article 5(4) ECHR Parole Board Procedures Judicial Review of Administrative Action Prisoners' Rights Damages for Breach of Rights

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Benjamin Alcock

Claimant

The Parole Board

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the delay in listing the claimant's parole hearing breached Article 5(4) ECHR
  2. 2 Whether the Parole Board's policy for prioritising hearings is lawful and properly applied
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is entitled to a declaration or mandatory order prioritising his case

Ratio Decidendi

The delay in listing the claimant's parole hearing constituted a breach of Article 5(4) ECHR, but there were no very special circumstances justifying a mandatory order or prioritisation of his case over others. The Parole Board's policy was not unlawful or irrational, and no damages were warranted as the claimant had not established entitlement to release. The claim for damages was dismissed and no formal order was made on the judicial review claim.

Court Disposition

Claim for damages dismissed; no order on judicial review claim; costs ordered up to 1 July 2009.

Orders

  • Claim for damages dismissed
  • No order on the claim for judicial review