DINSMORE (AP) AGAINST THE SCOTTISH MINISTERS [2019] ScotCS CSOH_55 (19 July 2019)

DINSMORE (AP) AGAINST THE SCOTTISH MINISTERS [2019] ScotCS CSOH_55 (19 July 2019)

The Scottish Ministers did not unlawfully fetter their discretion in refusing to commence the petitioner's HDC application process earlier, as the petitioner failed to present any exceptional circumstances justifying a departure from established policy. The statutory scheme is permissive, not mandatory, and is designed for public interest and prison management, not to confer individual entitlement to the maximum HDC period.

Citation
[2019] ScotCS CSOH_55
Parties
Petitioner: Niall Dinsmore (AP); Respondents: The Scottish Ministers
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
19 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Outer House, Court of Session Opinion
Outcome
Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Fettering of Discretion, Home Detention Curfew, Judicial Review, Parole, Statutory Interpretation
Administrative Law Prison Law Fettering of Discretion Home Detention Curfew Judicial Review Parole Statutory Interpretation

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Niall Dinsmore (AP)

Petitioner

The Scottish Ministers

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Outer House, Court of Session Opinion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Scottish Ministers unlawfully fettered their discretion by not commencing the petitioner's Home Detention Curfew (HDC) application process earlier, thereby preventing him from applying for the maximum period available under the HDC scheme.

Ratio Decidendi

The Scottish Ministers did not unlawfully fetter their discretion in refusing to commence the petitioner's HDC application process earlier, as the petitioner failed to present any exceptional circumstances justifying a departure from established policy. The statutory scheme is permissive, not mandatory, and is designed for public interest and prison management, not to confer individual entitlement to the maximum HDC period.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed

Orders

  • Petition refused
  • Third and fourth pleas in law for the respondents sustained