Murielle v Moore

In the case of Murielle v Moore, the plaintiffs, prisoners at Darwin Correctional Centre, sought relief from their transfer to Alice Springs Correctional Centre, claiming the defendants failed to accord them procedural fairness and took into account irrelevant considerations in the decision to transfer them. The defendants, who had custody of the plaintiffs, argued that the transfer was lawful and did not require procedural fairness or consideration of the specified factors. The court was tasked with determining whether the decision to transfer the plaintiffs was subject to judicial review and, if so, whether it was made in accordance with the applicable legal principles.

The court examined the legal precedents to determine whether the duty to accord procedural fairness arose in this case. It noted that the decision to transfer prisoners is typically considered an administrative decision not subject to judicial review. However, the plaintiffs argued that the transfer affected their rights, interests, and legitimate expectations, thus requiring procedural fairness. The court found that the decision to transfer was indeed subject to judicial review, as it affected the prisoners' rights and interests. Furthermore, the court concluded that the defendants were required to take into account relevant considerations, such as the impact of the transfer on the plaintiffs' right to receive visitors and their prospects of rehabilitation.

The court found that the transfer of the plaintiffs was unlawful as it was not made in accordance with the written direction of the Director, as required by s58 of the relevant legislation. Additionally, the court held that the decision to transfer was made without taking into account relevant considerations, such as the impact of the transfer on the plaintiffs' right to receive visitors and their prospects of rehabilitation. Consequently, the court found in favour of the plaintiffs.

The final orders of the court declared that the transfer of the plaintiffs to Alice Springs Correctional Centre was unlawful and invalid, and the defendants were directed to take appropriate steps to remedy the situation. The plaintiffs were also awarded costs of the proceedings.