||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 286 (Apr)
||European Court of Human Rights
Judges Pellonpaa (president), Bratza, Straznicka, Maruste, Pavlovschi, Garlicki and Borrego Borrego, and Mr M O'Boyle (Section Registrar)
||27 April 2004
Human rights - Liberty - Detention during Her Majesty's pleasure - Lawfulness of detention - Parole Board review procedure - Entitlement to non-pecuniary damages - European Convention on Human Rights, arts 5(3), 5(4) and 41.
The fact that the Parole Board had never in fact recommended the applicant's release following a review that did not meet the procedural requirements laid down by the European Court of Human Rights regarding mandatory life prisoners whose tariff had expired, did not deprive him of the right to have a review by a body offering the requisite guarantees. There had accordingly been a violation of his rights under art5(4) of the European Convention on Human Rights. Further, as there was no domestic right to compensation for such a breach, there had been a violation of art5(5). He was accordingly awarded 2,200 for damages for non-pecuniary loss.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary