Judicial Review challenge to Worboys release succeeds – case remitted to Parole Board for fresh decision. Parole Board rule 25 ultra vires
R (DSD & Anor) v The Parole Board of England and Wales [2018] EWHC 694 (Admin)
This was a judicial review challenge to the Parole Board direction to release John Worboys (now known as John Radford) and the lawfulness of Parole Board rule 25. In 2009 Worboys was convicted of 19 serious sexual offences committed between Oct 2006 and Feb 2008 involving twelve victims. He had been given an indeterminate sentence […]
Appeal against extradition order to Hungary for blackmail offence dismissed
Imre v District Court in Szolnok (Hungary) [2018] EWHC 218 (Admin)
This was an appeal by Imre against the decision by DJ Coleman dated 2 Jun 2017 which held that the European Arrest Warrant seeking his extradition to Hungary for a blackmail offence was valid. The Court dismissed the appeal in light of the further information provided by the District Court. In deciding whether the EAW […]
No evidence that the appellants had obstructed a highway
Carter-Brown & Ors v Crown Prosecution Service [2017] EWHC 1955 (QB)
The appellants were arrested and jointly charged with the offence of wilfully obstructing free passage along a highway without lawful authority or excuse contrary to the Highways Act 1980, s 137(1). The Court found that the finding of fact in the previous decision did not lead to the conclusion that the appellants had laid down on a highway rather than a private road. The convictions were quashed.
Disclosure considered in light of ECHR, art 6 and national security
K & Ors v Secretary of State for Defence & Anor [2017] EWHC 830 (Admin)
The question for the Court was what disclosure was required for there to be a “fair and public hearing” of the claims, which would determine the claimant’s civil rights in relation to the public law claims. The issue of disclosure had to be considered in lights of conclusions that the ECHR, art 6 applied to the public law claims. The Court held that a balance has to be struck between the significance of material not otherwise disclosed to the claimants and the harm disclosure could have on national security.
Extradition compatible with ECHR, art 3
Dzgoev v Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation [2017] EWHC 735 (Admin)
The question for the Court was whether the extradition of the appellant would be incompatible with the ECHR, art 3 and contrary to the Extradition Act 2003, s 91 as it would be unjust or oppressive due to his physical or mental condition. The challenge failed in terms of post-trial detention and the adequacy of medical facilities in detention. The appeal was stayed on grounds related to detention before trial awaiting further assurances.