Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2016] All ER (D) 72 (Dec)
Neutral Citation: [2016] UKSC 62
Court: Supreme Court

Lord Neuberger P, Lord Mance, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath and Lord Hughes SCJJ

Representation Kirsty Brimelow QC and Philip Rule (instructed by EBR Attridge) for D.
  John McGuinness QC and Simon Heptonstall (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service Appeals and Review Unit) for the crown.
  David Perry QC and Melanie Cumberland (instructed by the Government Legal Service) for the Secretary of State for Justice, as intervener.
Judgment Dates: 14 December 2016


Sentence - Custodial sentence - Indeterminate sentence of imprisonment for public protection - Appellant, D, being sentenced in December 2012 to indefinite term of imprisonment for public protection (IPP) - Sentence being made while scheme for sentencing similar offenders being in course of change - Transitional provisions preserving old scheme sentences if conviction being before prescribed commencement date - D appealing against sentence - Whether, among other things, applying earlier scheme being unlawful as contrary to principle of lex mitior - Whether applying earlier scheme being ultra vires - European Convention on Human Rights, art 7.

The Case

Sentence Custodial sentence. The Supreme Court dismissed the defendant's appeal against a sentence of indeterminate sentence of imprisonment for public protection, made while the scheme provided for by the as amended, under which the sentence was made, was being replaced by a different one under the . The court held that, among other things, the present appeal amounted to a claim by the defendant to anticipate the commencement of the change of regime, which he could not do. Anticipation of a change which was yet to take effect was no part of the international principle of lex mitior.

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