Quinn, Re Judicial Review [2015] ScotCS CSOH_110 (12 August 2015)

Quinn, Re Judicial Review [2015] ScotCS CSOH_110 (12 August 2015)

Petitioner failed to plead factual basis for systemic failure; prioritisation policy based on earliest release date is rational and non-discriminatory. No relevant case made for breach of duty or discrimination. Orders sought are either irrelevant, incompetent, or premature. Proof may be allowed if orders are reframed regarding petitioner’s individual treatment.

Citation
[2015] ScotCS CSOH_110
Parties
Petitioner: Stuart Quinn; Respondents: Scottish Ministers
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
12 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / First Hearing; Petition Dismissed in Part, Further Hearing Possible
Outcome
Petition dismissed in part; systemic and policy challenges rejected; petitioner invited to amend orders for further hearing on individual claims; damages claim deferred.
Legal Topics
Rehabilitation of Prisoners, Prioritisation Policy, European Convention on Human Rights, Judicial Review, Discrimination
Public Law Human Rights Law Prison Law Rehabilitation of Prisoners Prioritisation Policy European Convention on Human Rights Judicial Review Discrimination

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stuart Quinn

Petitioner

Scottish Ministers

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / First Hearing; Petition Dismissed in Part, Further Hearing Possible

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Scottish Ministers failed to provide reasonable opportunity for rehabilitation to life prisoners
  2. 2 Whether prioritisation policy for rehabilitative coursework is unlawful or discriminatory
  3. 3 Whether petitioner’s Convention rights under ECHR Articles 5 and 14 were breached

Ratio Decidendi

Petitioner failed to plead factual basis for systemic failure; prioritisation policy based on earliest release date is rational and non-discriminatory. No relevant case made for breach of duty or discrimination. Orders sought are either irrelevant, incompetent, or premature. Proof may be allowed if orders are reframed regarding petitioner’s individual treatment.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed in part; systemic and policy challenges rejected; petitioner invited to amend orders for further hearing on individual claims; damages claim deferred.

Orders

  • Dismissal of systemic failure complaint
  • Dismissal of prioritisation policy challenge