AC-2025-LON-000643 - [2025] EWHC 2024 (Admin)

This is a challenge to the legality of the Defendant’s decision dated 15 January 2025 to revoke the Claimant’s licence and recall him to prison under s32(1) Crime (Sentences) Act 1997.

The Claimant is a 50 year old man who is serving a life sentence for murder committed on 23 December 2005. On 30 October 2006 he was sentenced to life imprisonment with a tariff of 14 years, less time on remand.

On 25 January 2020 the Claimant’s tariff expired.

On 14 July 2022 the Parole Board held an oral hearing and on 18 July 2022 it made a direction for release. He was released on licence on 6 October 2022.

On 3 February 2023 the Defendant revoked the Claimant’s licence and recalled him to prison.

On 15 March 2024, over a year later, the Parole Board held an oral hearing.

On 25 March 2024 the Parole Board directed the Claimant’s release.

On 11 April 2024 the Claimant was released on licence.

On 15 January 2025 the Probation Service completed a Part A Recall Report alleging that the Claimant had breached the condition requiring abstinence from alcohol on three separate occasions (14/15 December; 17/18 December; and 23/24 December 2024). It was recorded that the Claimant categorically denied consuming any alcohol and asserted that the alcohol reading was false. Information had been obtained from the alcohol tag company suggesting that the tag was likely to have been working properly.

The same day the Defendant revoked the Claimant’s licence and recalled him to prison.

On 3 February 2025 the Parole Board directed the Claimant’s case to an oral hearing, which is yet to be listed.

On 3 March 2025 this claim was issued, with an application for expedition.

On 7 March 2025 Johnson J refused the Claimant’s application for expedition.

On 3 April 2025 permission was granted on the papers by Matthew Butt KC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, with the following observations:

“[t]he claim is arguable given the findings of the parole board on 25 March 2024 following the previous recall”.

I acknowledge the hard work, care and skill which has been deployed by both parties’ counsel over the course of the hearing and in written submissions in the preparation and presentation of their respective cases. I do not intend any disrespect to either of the parties if I do not address every single point which has been made to me, but I have taken them all into account and what follows is my assessment of the issues important to the disposal of this claim.