DL v The Parole Board For Scotland & Ors [2008] ScotCS CSOH_168 (09 December 2008)

DL v The Parole Board For Scotland & Ors [2008] ScotCS CSOH_168 (09 December 2008)

The petitioner's application to the sheriff court for contact with his child, made without the knowledge or approval of his supervising officer, constituted a clear breach of licence condition 12. The Parole Board and Scottish Ministers were entitled and reasonable in recalling the petitioner to custody and refusing his release.

Citation
[2008] ScotCS CSOH_168
Parties
Petitioner: D L; First Respondent: The Parole Board for Scotland; Second Respondent: Scottish Ministers
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
09 December 2008
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / First Hearing, Judgment Delivered
Outcome
petition refused
Legal Topics
Parole, Licence Conditions, Breach of Licence, Child Protection, Judicial Review
Criminal Law Public Law Prison Law Parole Licence Conditions Breach of Licence Child Protection Judicial Review

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D L

Petitioner

The Parole Board for Scotland

First Respondent

Scottish Ministers

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / First Hearing, Judgment Delivered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the petitioner's application to the sheriff court for contact with his child constituted a breach of licence condition 12
  2. 2 Whether the Parole Board and Scottish Ministers acted lawfully and reasonably in recalling the petitioner to custody

Ratio Decidendi

The petitioner's application to the sheriff court for contact with his child, made without the knowledge or approval of his supervising officer, constituted a clear breach of licence condition 12. The Parole Board and Scottish Ministers were entitled and reasonable in recalling the petitioner to custody and refusing his release.

Court Disposition

petition refused

Orders

  • First respondents' fourth plea-in-law upheld
  • Second respondents' fourth plea-in-law upheld