Prisons in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • Raymond v Honey
    • House of Lords
    • 04 Mar 1982

    In my opinion, there is nothing in the Prison Act 1952 that confers power to make regulations which would deny, or interfere with, the right of the respondent, as a prisoner, to have unimpeded access to a court. Section 47, which has already been quoted, is a section concerned with the regulation and management of prisons and, in my opinion, is quite insufficient to authorise hindrance or interference with so basic a right.

  • R (Al-Hasan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; R (Carroll) v Same
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 20 Jul 2001

    Here this was the situation in relation to Deputy Governor Copple. Because the lawfulness of the order was being challenged, it was apparent there could be questions which required, if they were answered, the revelation of information which the prison could reasonably wish to remain confidential in the interests of security. For example, in prisons, sources of information are vital to the maintenance of security and control.

  • R (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
    • House of Lords
    • 23 May 2001

    First, the doctrine of proportionality may require the reviewing court to assess the balance which the decision maker has struck, not merely whether it is within the range of rational or reasonable decisions. Secondly, the proportionality test may go further than the traditional grounds of review inasmuch as it may require attention to be directed to the relative weight accorded to interests and considerations.

  • R (Imtiaz Amin) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
    • House of Lords
    • 16 Oct 2003

    The purposes of such an investigation are clear: to ensure so far as possible that the full facts are brought to light; that culpable and discreditable conduct is exposed and brought to public notice; that suspicion of deliberate wrongdoing (if unjustified) is allayed; that dangerous practices and procedures are rectified; and that those who have lost their relative may at least have the satisfaction of knowing that lessons learned from his death may save the lives of others.

  • R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Simms
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 04 Dic 1997

    The potential for increased problems with security and discipline, staff, other inmates, and after conviction, with victims or their families, all underline the need for control of such visits to be vested in and exercised by the Governor. This is what the regulatory framework is intended to achieve and in the circumstances I have concluded that the restriction currently under consideration is not ultra vires.

  • R (Lichniak) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
    • House of Lords
    • 25 Nov 2002

    I doubt whether there is in truth a burden on the prisoner to persuade the Parole Board that it is safe to recommend release, since this is an administrative process requiring the board to consider all the available material and form a judgment.

  • R v Board of Visitors of Hull Prison, ex parte St Germain
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 03 Oct 1978

    Section 47 of the Prison Act, 1952 , deals with what the rubric describes as "rules for the management of prisons and other institutions". Sub-section (l) reads: "The Secretary of State may make rules for the regulation and management of prisons, remand centres, detention centres and Borstal institutions respectively, and for the classification, treatment, employment, discipline and control of persons required to be detained therein".

See all results
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT