R (Johnson) v SSJ (2009) EWHC 3336 (Admin): Difference between revisions
(Created page with '''The Secretary of State's decision that the next Parole Board review would occur 14-15 months after the last review was unsupported by any reason and, on the facts, inconsistent…') |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
''The Secretary of State's decision that the next Parole Board review would occur 14-15 months after the last review was unsupported by any reason and, on the facts, inconsistent with [[Article 5]](4).'' | ''The Secretary of State's decision that the next Parole Board review would occur 14-15 months after the last review was unsupported by any reason and, on the facts, inconsistent with [[Article 5]](4).'' | ||
==Other== | |||
Judgment: 18 December 2009 | |||
Hearing date: 3 December 2009 | |||
Before: Langstaff J | |||
Mr Southey (instructed by Chivers Solicitors) for the Claimant | |||
Mr Gerard Clarke (instructed by Treasury Solicitor) for the Defendant | |||
==External link== | ==External link== | ||
Revision as of 19:11, 23 December 2009
The Secretary of State's decision that the next Parole Board review would occur 14-15 months after the last review was unsupported by any reason and, on the facts, inconsistent with Article 5(4).
Other
Judgment: 18 December 2009
Hearing date: 3 December 2009
Before: Langstaff J
Mr Southey (instructed by Chivers Solicitors) for the Claimant
Mr Gerard Clarke (instructed by Treasury Solicitor) for the Defendant
External link
The following categories (in blue boxes) can be clicked to view a list of other pages in the same category: