Jersey Judgment

AG -v- Coughlan [2011] JRC 184A (23 September 2011)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The decision of the Assistant Magistrate to refuse bail was not unlawful or so unreasonable that no reasonable Magistrate could have reached it, and current authority holds that detention in the adult female wing is not unlawful.

Court disposition

application refused

Orders

  • Applicant remanded back in custody in accordance with the Assistant Magistrate's decision

02

Material facts

Parties

Miss Coughlan

Applicant Counsel: Miss Fogarty

Crown

Respondent

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Bail Review Application / Review of Magistrate's Refusal of Bail

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The Magistrate acted unlawfully in refusing bail and in detaining a young woman under 18 in the adult female wing of the prison.
Respondent
The Crown does not oppose the application.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    LG-v-AG [2009] JRC 039

    It is not unlawful to detain a young woman under 18 in the adult female wing of the prison.

  2. 02

    General principle of judicial review

    A reviewing court must determine if the Magistrate acted unlawfully or so unreasonably that no reasonable Magistrate could have reached that view.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The decision of the Assistant Magistrate to refuse bail was not unlawful or so unreasonable that no reasonable Magistrate could have reached it, and current authority holds that detention in the adult female wing is not unlawful.

Obiter and limits

  • There is a pending application before the European Court of Human Rights regarding this issue, but the court will not prejudge its outcome.

Court disposition

application refused

  • Applicant remanded back in custody in accordance with the Assistant Magistrate's decision

Source and reliance status

Official court record

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court record

Judgment

[2011] JRC 184A

JUDGMENT THE DEPUTY BAILIFF: 1. This is an application for review of the decision of the Magistrate to refuse bail to the applicant who was originally granted bail on conditions which included a curfew and which she broke on two occasions. Another of the conditions was that she should not have alcohol at her home and in the course of breaching the conditions (and clearly the intention behind that condition was that she should not be drinking it,) on the information that has been given to us she was apparently drinking alcohol with her aunt.

2. We do not have to decide whether that was or was not a breach of condition in the strict sense but it clearly ran against the intentions of the Magistrate in putting the conditions on which she did. But there was a breach of the curfew on two occasions. The Magistrate had to consider these matters when the matter was referred to her and she chose to reach the view, in the exercise of her discretion, that it was right to refuse any further bail.

3. The test for this Court is whether in doing so, she acted unlawfully or acted so unreasonably that no reasonable Magistrate could have reached that view. Miss Fogarty contends that she acted unlawfully. The current state of the authorities is as set out in LG-v-AG [2009] JRC 039 , a decision of the Royal Court on 4 th March, 2009. We are certain that that decision was to the effect that it was not unlawful to detain a young woman under the age of 18 in the adult female wing at the prison and we are not prepared, on the basis of the submissions which have been put before us today, to declare that that decision of the Royal Court, on that occasion was wrong. We are going to follow it because we are not satisfied that it was wrong. As a result we are told that there is a pending before the European Court of Human Rights in Strasburg an application in relation to this very decision and of course, that may or may not be successful. We are not going to prejudge that by assuming that it will be. The current state of the authorities is that it is not unlawful to detain a woman of this age in the adult female wing of the prison.

4. That being so, we have to consider whether or not the decision of the Assistant Magistrate was so unreasonable that no reasonable Magistrate could have reached it. Although the Crown does not oppose, for whatever reason, this application, we do not think that the decision of the Assistant Magistrate can possibly be categorised in that way.

5. Accordingly we refuse to review the decision in the way that has been contended for by Miss Fogarty and Miss Coughlan, you must therefore be remanded back in custody in accordance with the Assistant Magistrate's decision. Authorities LG-v-AG [2009] JRC 039 . Page Last Updated: 07 Feb 2017 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

LG-v-AG [2009] JRC 039

Case cited

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.