Hutchison Reid (AP) v The Scottish Ministers [2017] ScotCS CSIH_20 (02 March 2017)

Hutchison Reid (AP) v The Scottish Ministers [2017] ScotCS CSIH_20 (02 March 2017)

The Scottish Prison Service provided opportunities reasonable in all the circumstances for the petitioner to rehabilitate himself; delays in programme commencement and assessments were not inordinate or unreasonable given resource constraints, professional requirements, and the petitioner's unique history and cognitive limitations. No breach of Article 5 ECHR duty was established.

Citation
[2017] ScotCS CSIH_20
Parties
Petitioner and Reclaimer: Alexander Lewis Hutchison Reid (AP); Respondents: The Scottish Ministers
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
02 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Appeal (reclaiming Motion)
Outcome
Reclaiming motion refused; interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary adhered to.
Legal Topics
Article 5 ECHR, Rehabilitation of Life Prisoners, Prisoner Rights, Delay in Rehabilitation Programmes
Human Rights Prison Law Administrative Law Article 5 ECHR Rehabilitation of Life Prisoners Prisoner Rights Delay in Rehabilitation Programmes

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alexander Lewis Hutchison Reid (AP)

Petitioner and Reclaimer

The Scottish Ministers

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Appeal (reclaiming Motion)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Scottish Prison Service breached Article 5 ECHR by failing to provide reasonable opportunities for rehabilitation to a post-tariff life prisoner
  2. 2 Whether delays in rehabilitation programmes and assessments constituted a breach of duty under Article 5 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The Scottish Prison Service provided opportunities reasonable in all the circumstances for the petitioner to rehabilitate himself; delays in programme commencement and assessments were not inordinate or unreasonable given resource constraints, professional requirements, and the petitioner's unique history and cognitive limitations. No breach of Article 5 ECHR duty was established.

Court Disposition

Reclaiming motion refused; interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary adhered to.

Orders

  • No declarator of breach of Article 5 ECHR granted.
  • No damages awarded.