header-logo header-logo

12 July 2007
Issue: 7281 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Sentencing

R (Gulliver) v Parole Board [2007] All ER (D) 63 (Jul)

When considering the recall to prison of a prisoner who has been released on licence, the parole board is not confined to a review of secretary of state’s reasons for recall, but is entitled to take into account all relevant circumstances.

The secretary of state’s power to recall a prisoner on licence is not limited to cases where there is a breach of a licence condition but can be for other reasons, such as the protection of the public.

There may be exceptional cases in which it might be appropriate to apply for judicial review of the secretary of state’s decision to recall the prisoner, but they would be few and far between. 

Issue: 7281 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll