On 9 June 2026 the High Court (Eady J) dismissed the Secretary of State for Justice’s (“SSJ’s”) claim for judicial review o fa decision of the Parole Board, refusing to set aside the Board’s release direction in respect of Reginald Zenshen, a life sentence prisoner.
The case was unusual in that the claim was not brought until after Mr Zenshen had been released. Eady J held that, despite acknowledged delays, the claim had been brought in time. Despite the introduction of a new statutory power under s32ZAA of the Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 for the SSJ to direct the Board to refer release decisions to the High Court, the claim should not, the Court held, be dismissed on the ground that there was a suitable alternative remedy. Practitioners may find the judgment helpful on both those issues. Eady J left open whether the length of time now spent in the community meant that the application had become futile and she did not need to determine whether the Board would have had the power to reconsider the SSJ’s set aside application in circumstances in which Mr Zenshen has already been released. The Court dismissed the SSJ’s application on the merits, relying in particular on the high hurdle to overcome on a rationality challenge given the Parole Board’s specialist expertise.
Nick Armstrong KC and Aidan Wills represented Mr Zenshen, instructed by Simon Creighton of Bhatt Murphy Solicitors.
The judgment may be found here.