Campbell, Re Judicial Review v [2008] ScotCS CSOH_16 (30 January 2008)

Campbell, Re Judicial Review v [2008] ScotCS CSOH_16 (30 January 2008)

Procedural fairness required that the petitioner be given an oral hearing to challenge the truth or accuracy of the information leading to his downgrade in security status, as facts were in issue and the outcome could be affected. The Parole Board's failure to provide such a hearing constituted significant injustice and breached the common law duty of fairness.

Citation
[2008] ScotCS CSOH_16
Parties
Petitioner: Derek Campbell; First Respondent: The Parole Board for Scotland; Second Respondent: The Scottish Ministers
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
30 January 2008
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Opinion of the Court (outer House, Court of Session)
Outcome
Petition upheld in part; declarator and reduction granted as craved in statements 3(b) and (e); other pleas repelled.
Legal Topics
Procedural Fairness, Parole Board Decisions, Right to Oral Hearing, Judicial Review, Prisoners' Rights
Administrative Law Prison Law Human Rights Procedural Fairness Parole Board Decisions Right to Oral Hearing Judicial Review Prisoners' 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 5 Authorities cited 30 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Derek Campbell

Petitioner

The Parole Board for Scotland

First Respondent

The Scottish Ministers

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Opinion of the Court (outer House, Court of Session)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Parole Board's refusal to grant an oral hearing was procedurally unfair at common law
  2. 2 Whether the Parole Board's failure to disclose police report information or appoint a special advocate was procedurally unfair
  3. 3 Whether the reasons given by the Parole Board for its decision were adequate

Ratio Decidendi

Procedural fairness required that the petitioner be given an oral hearing to challenge the truth or accuracy of the information leading to his downgrade in security status, as facts were in issue and the outcome could be affected. The Parole Board's failure to provide such a hearing constituted significant injustice and breached the common law duty of fairness.

Court Disposition

Petition upheld in part; declarator and reduction granted as craved in statements 3(b) and (e); other pleas repelled.

Orders

  • Declarator that the Parole Board's decision was procedurally unfair and unlawful
  • Reduction (quashing) of the Parole Board's decision of 13 March 2007