header-logo header-logo

22 January 2010
Issue: 7401 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Prisoner

R (on the application of KB (a child, by his litigation friend LW) v Secretary of State for Justice [2010] EWHC 15 (Admin); [2010] All ER (D) 59 (Jan)

Section 47(1) of the Prison Act 1952 contained two limbs. The first limb had rules “for the regulation and management of prisons”. The second limb had rules “for the classification … discipline and control of persons detained therein”. The first limb of s 47(1) could scarcely intend that rules made by the secretary of state were exhaustive of all matters of “regulation and management”.

The word “management”, in particular, was very wide and there would have to be matters of management which might lawfully be prescribed at a local level outside the provisions of the rules, provided they did not conflict with any express provision of the rules. Section 47(2) required that rules make provision, cumulatively, for: (i) a prescribed and identifiable process of charge; for (ii) a prescribed and identified offence; with (iii) a prescribed proper opportunity for a person charged to present his case.

 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll