NGJF v Prisoners Review Board

The plaintiff, NGJF, brought proceedings against the Prisoners Review Board seeking a declaration that a report prepared by the Board did not constitute a decision for the purposes of s 107B of the Sentence Administration Act 2003 and an order that the Board provide reasons for its decision to refuse parole. The case was heard and determined by the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The central issue before the Court was whether the report constituted a decision for the purposes of s 107B, and if so, whether the Board was required to provide reasons for its decision in the report. The Court considered whether the report was a decision that required reasons under s 107B of the Act.

In determining whether the report constituted a decision, the Court held that s 107B(3) listed decisions that attract the notification obligation, but this was an inclusive not an exclusive list. Therefore, other decisions may also fall under the obligation to provide reasons. The Court found that the Board's report recommending that parole be refused was a decision that required reasons under s 107B(4) of the Act. The Court held that the Board was required to provide reasons for its decision to refuse parole, regardless of whether the decision was made by the Board or the Governor. The Court found that the Board had failed to provide adequate reasons in the report for its decision to refuse parole.

The Court made a declaration that the report did constitute a decision for the purposes of s 107B of the Sentence Administration Act 2003 and ordered the Board to provide reasons for its decision to refuse parole. The Court held that the Board was required to provide reasons for its decision in the report, regardless of whether the decision was made by the Board or the Governor. The Court found that the Board had failed to provide adequate reasons in the report for its decision to refuse parole.