Hart v Parole Board

Hart brought an application for judicial review against the Parole Board, challenging the Board's decision to deny parole. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court. The primary issue for the Court was whether to grant an extension of time for Hart to file an application for judicial review and, if so, whether to grant permission for the application itself.

The Court considered the principles governing extensions of time in judicial review applications, particularly the requirement that the applicant demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the delay and that the action still has utility. The Board argued that the delay was unreasonable and that the application had lost its utility given the passage of time since the parole decision. Hart did not provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay, nor could he demonstrate that the application still had utility. The Court was satisfied that the Board's decision to deny parole remained effective and that further judicial review would not serve a meaningful purpose.

The Court found that the application did not meet the threshold for an extension of time and that there was no compelling reason to permit the application to proceed. The Court refused permission for the application, concluding that the action lacked utility and that the delay was unreasonable. Consequently, the application for judicial review was dismissed. The Court did not grant an extension of time or permission for the application, and no further orders were made.