Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2003] All ER (D) 119 (Feb)
Court: Administrative Court
Judge:

Elias J

Representation Edward Fitzgerald QC and Kris Gledhill (instructed by Bhatt Murphy) for the claimant.
  Karen Steyn (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Parole Board.
  Nigel Giffin (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Secretary of State for the Home Department.
Judgment Dates: 11 February 2003

Catchwords

Human rights - Liberty - Detention - Lawfulness - Extended sentence - Recall on licence - Consideration of detention by parole board - Applicability of European Convention on Human Rights - Test for continuing detention - s 44A - European Convention on Human Rights, art 5(4).

The Case

The test to be applied under s 44A(4) of the was whether continuing confinement was necessary for the protection of the public. As the sentencing judge had already identified the potential risk what the board had to identify was whether that risk could continue to be dealt with by supervision or whether those arrangements had broken down to the extent that the protection of the public interest warranted recall.

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.