News / Supreme Court ruling on HDC for prisoners


Supreme Court ruling on HDC for prisoners  

30/06/2010

Supreme Court upholds appeal and reverses lower court decisions on ‘Home Detention Curfew’ in ruling which will affect the release dates of hundreds of prisoners on an ongoing basis.

R (on the application of Rebecca Noone) v (1) the Governor of HMP Drake Hall, (2) Secretary of State for Justice [2010] UKSC 30; The Times Law Reports 2/7/10

Summary

The Appellant, Ms Noone, was sentenced to consecutive terms totalling 27 months for offences of theft and contempt of court. Because of the way in which the SSJ interpreted the relevant provisions she was deemed eligible for release on HDC about 100 days later than a prisoner who had been sentenced to a single term of 27 months on the same day. The Supreme Court have recognised the absurdity of this interpretation and adopted the Appellant’s construction which gives consistent and just results regardless of how sentences are passed. It is clear that many low risk prisoners will be immediately released as a result of this decision.
> link to judgment

This case concerned the calculation of eligibility for Home Detention Curfew (otherwise known as ‘tagging’) for prisoners who are serving consecutive sentences made up of terms of more and less than 12 months. The decision affects hundreds of prisoners on an ongoing basis, who were artificially prevented from being released on this scheme by the Secretary of State’s mistaken construction of the relevant legislation.

In R (Steven Highton) v Gov of HMYOI Lancaster Farms and SSHD [2007] EWHC 1085 Admin the High Court upheld the SSJ’s construction of Para 14, Sch 2 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (Commencement No 8 and Transitional and Savings Provisions) Order 2005, which meant that where prisoners were sentenced to consecutive terms of 12 months or more, and less than 12 months, different statutory regimes applied to the sentence calculation of the two parts; the sentences of 12 months or more were to be dealt with under the CJA 2003, and the less than 12 month sentences were to be dealt with under the CJA 1991. Under the SSJ’s construction HDC was only applied to the latter term which meant that prisoners would have to serve up to 135 days longer than under either the 1991 Act scheme or that which replaced it under the 2003 Act, and the order in which consecutive sentences were passed became critical.

For example, a prisoner is sentenced to 18 months for theft with 1 month consecutive for contempt of court. Under the 1991 Act scheme he/she would be eligible for the maximum 135 days release on HDC. Under the 2003 Act exactly the same would apply. Under the SSJ’s construction, calculation of release dates would be separate, the 1 month term would be served last, and there would be no HDC eligibility. If another prisoner had been sentence to the same terms but in reverse order he/she would be eligible for full 135 days HDC as the 18 month term would be served last.

In the instant case at first instance, Mitting J expressed his concern for the SSJ’s construction of the statutory provisions adopted in Highton describing it as an “unattractive conclusion”, nevertheless he felt compelled to uphold it. However, he allowed the Claim for jr on policy grounds.

The SSJ appealed and Ms Noone cross-appealed on the construction point. The appeal was upheld and the cross-appeal dismissed; [2009] 1 WLR 1321 (Lord Clarke MR, Scott Baker and Wall LJs), with the judgment holding that the ‘policy’ of the SSJ was no more than the proper interpretation of the provisions.

The Supreme Court were unanimous (Lords Phillips, Saville, Brown, Mance and Judge) in reversing the CoA and over-ruling Highton in the most forthright terms, and adopting the Appellant’s construction. Lord Phillips commenced his judgment thus; “The road to hell is paved with good intentions”, with “hell” being the problem of statutory interpretation in this case. His conclusion was to re-word Paragraph 14 so as to make it work in accordance with the clear intention of Parliament.

Lord Brown asserted at para 43;
“The construction of this legislation…hitherto adopted has led to the most astonishing consequences which no rational draftsman can ever have contemplated, let alone intended”. He continued; “To my mind the problems created by the Court of Appeal’s construction of this legislation are, quite simply, intolerable.”

At para 47 he concluded;
“As to the precise route by which this plainly preferable construction is to be reached, I am entirely content to follow that taken by Lord Phillips and Lord Mance…so absurd is the alternative conclusion hitherto arrived at, almost any coherent alternative construction will suffice.”

At para 86-7 Lord Judge joined the fray;
“I have studied the judgments of Lord Phillips and Lord Mance. Their judgments tell the lamentable story of how elementary principles of justice have come, in this case, to be buried in the legislative morass. They have achieved a construction of the relevant legislation which produces both justice and common sense. I should have been inclined to reject the Secretary of State’s contention on the grounds of absurdity – absurd because it contravened elementary principles of justice in the sentencing process – but Lord Phillips and Lord Mance have provided more respectable solutions, either or both of which I gratefully adopt.
Nevertheless the element of absurdity remains. It is outrageous that so much intellectual effort, as well as public time and resources, have had to be expended in order to discover a route through the legislative morass to what should be, both for the prisoner herself, and for those responsible for her custody, the prison authorities, the simplest and most certain of questions – the prisoner’s release date.”

Conclusions

The judgment will mean that hundreds of low risk prisoners will have to have their release dates urgently re-calculated and they will be released on HDC where appropriate. An FOI request in the course of these proceedings revealed that the Prison Service themselves do not know how many prisoners will be affected but it will clearly be many hundreds and the effect will be continuing.
The construction arrived at by the Supreme Court will be straightforward for the Prison authorities to operate and should be easier for prisoners and their advisors to understand. In all cases involving concurrent and consecutive sentences the sentences will be combined under the provisions of Sections 263 and 264 of the 2003 Act other than where all the constituent sentences are less than 12 months when the 1991 Act regime will still apply. HDC will thereby apply to the totality of the term in all cases and hence there will be no anomalies or reductions in the number of eligible days.

Apart from the HDC problem the judgments are also important in respect to the extent to which the judges were prepared to go to in reading down legislative provisions to make them work to the clear intention of Parliament.

Pete Weatherby and Andy Fitzpatrick appeared for the Appellant, instructed by Deborah Russo of the Prisoners Advice Service .

Quick links

> Noone win at Supreme Court - PAS website news story

> 25/2/09 Administrative Court ruling on HDC for prisoners



Right menu

  What's New?  
 

#Iamforjustice/ #saveukjustice

Law Society / LAPG / LAG Legal Aid Still Available Leaflet

CCMS Resources page

Now on Twitter  @gcnchambers  

8.9.16 Hillsborough Law launched

16/8/16 Manchester Peterloo Massacre anniversary - GCN and others challenge UAE Human Rights record

15/8/16 Landlords behaving badly - damages for dispossession

15/8/16 Pete Weatherby QC on renewed critique of IPP sentences

27/7/16 3-Judge Upper Tribunal panel allows Tax Credit Appeals test case

26/7/16 Tribute to Bryan McGuire QC 

20/7/16 Tenants and borrowers subjected to unlawful evictions (defective N325 forms)

8/7/16 LALY16 outstanding achievement award for GCN Hillsborough team

29/6/16 Tom Royston speaking at LAG Housing Law Conference

24/6/16 Certifying asylum and human rights claims as “clearly unfounded”  

17/6/16 GCN immigration team response to MoJ consultation on tribunal fees

GCN sponsors PLP JR North conference 14.7.16 Manchester

Immigration and EU law for housing lawyers - the new Immigration Act, Brexit and more | Housing seminar | 6.7.16

The Immigration Act 2016 | Immigration seminar | 1.7.16

GCN to host INQUEST Conference and fundraising quiz 16.6.16

Mark George QC speaking at YLAL North meeting 15.6.16

20/5/16 Joe Markus shortlisted for LALY Legal Aid Newcomer Award

GCN Criminal Law update May 2016

26/4/16 Truth Justice Accountability | Hillsborough 22 Families Press Conference

26/4/16 A landmark day in legal history - Hillsborough Inquests

11/4/16 Recompense for the wrongfully convicted (Nealon)

22/3/16 Supreme Court grants permission in Kiarie

18/3/16 Not guilty verdict for Chetham violin teacher

4/3/16 GCN wins Barristers' Chambers of the Year at MLA 2016

29/2/16 Permission to appeal in relation to adult dependent relative rule

17/3/16 GCN launches new Appeals and Miscarriages of Justice Team

18/2/16 Considering Jogee: Joint Enterprise, Retrospective Effect and Fresh Appeals - Mark George QC and Matt Stanbury

11/2/16 CART-style JR of Upper Tribunal succeeds  

9/2/16 Appeal allowed in "police officer on jury" case after CCRC referral  

8/2/16 Permission granted in best interests (grandchild) immigration appeal

5/2/16 Repeated acquittals in historic cases

3/2/16 Housing allocation scheme - discrimination challenge by Irish Traveller

27/1/16 Bedroom Tax victory

GCN barristers present PLP "How to JR"

Matt Stanbury presents "JR for criminal practitioners"

25/1/16 SSHD failure to apply own policy to Victim of Trafficking

5/1/16 Important statelessness JR (Semeda)

5/1/16 GCN members elected to BHRC Exec Committee

18/12/15 GCN remains totally committed to first class representation through legal aid

17/12/15 Permission granted in trafficking JR

16/12/15 Natalie Wilkins writes in  Family Law

15/12/15 Gary Willock on delay in obtaining Legal Aid

12/12/15 Extension of Workers Registration Scheme 2009 Appeal now listed for Feb 2017

11/12/15 Court of Appeal quashes extended sentence

23/11/15 Sentence reduced (serious health problems and delays)

12/11/15 GCN Housing Bulletin: disrepair and injunctions

3/11/15 Chambers UK Bar Guide ranks GCN in Band 1

Tom Royston speaking at CPAG seminar

30/10/15 Transgender prisoners

26/10/15 Successful out of time sentence appeal

Anti-Slavery Day event

30/9/15 Acquittal in Operation Pallial

28/9/15 Immigration FTT recognizes appellant as Victim of Trafficking (VOT)

24/9/15 Immigration FTT relies on Trafficking JR

17/9/15 Legal 500: Counsel "easy to work with and quickly engage"; Clerks "consistently very helpful"

11/9/15 FGM Protection Order to safeguard 13 year old taken to Sudan

9/9/15 Ben McCormack Court of Protection talk for YLAL North

14/7/15 GCN crime team support Rally to Save Criminal Legal Aid

30/6/15 GCN crime team "It's time we took action"

12/6/15 Mark George QC on IPCC Orgreave report

Kate Stone chairs PLP "Private Law for Public Law Practitioners"

4/6/15 Art 8 defences for Canal and River Trust  

Lucy Mair speaking at "Contemporary Issues in Refugee Law" 7.7.15 (Lancaster)

28/5/15 Lucy Mair discusses Eve Ensler's "Avocado" human trafficking monologue

27/5/15 Lucy Mair on trafficking JR (Free Movement)

13/5/15 Abuse of process argument succeeds

Pete Weatherby QC  at Haldane "Child Sex Abuse Inquiry" Lecture 

Pete Weatherby QC at Prisoners' Advice Service panel discussion

20/4/15 Matt Stanbury on Bad News for Good Character

20/3/15 Sex Offender Notification Reviews Guidance

4/3/15 Joe Markus appointed to EHRC Panel of Counsel

26/2/15 S222 injunction to restrain begging in Leeds City Centre

16/2/15 Extension of Workers Registration Scheme was unlawful

13/2/15 Rory O'Ryan appointed as Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge

27/1/15 Permission granted in homelessness affordability appeal

13/1/15 Kate Stone on Human Rights and Arms Trade Treaty

5/1/15 GCN move to Blackfriars House profiled in M.E.N

15/12/14 Gudanaviciene (exceptional funding)   

10/12/14 Landmark Supreme Court decision on ISP Prisoners

5/12/14 UT decision on Bereavement Benefits and telephone marriage

13/11/14 Permission to appeal granted in benefits case

10/10/14 Pete Weatherby QC wins Legal 500 Regional Silk Award 2014

3/10/14 Clerks  "first class " in Legal 500 2014