Raven v. Chief Executive, Department of Corrective Services

The case involved Christine Jacqueline Raven, a prisoner at the Brisbane Women's Correctional Centre, who had been sentenced to a term of imprisonment for property offences. Raven was released to home detention in December 1996 and later granted leave of absence to work in August 1998. She committed further offences in January 1999 and was returned to secure custody. Raven sought a declaration that she was entitled to remission on the balance of her eight-year sentence after being returned to secure custody on 11 January 1999, as the Corrective Services Act 1988 was amended by the insertion of s 207B in December 2000, extinguishing her eligibility for remission.

The legal issues before the court were whether the applicant was entitled to remission on the balance of her eight-year sentence after being returned to secure custody and if the amendments to the Corrective Services Act 1988 extinguished her eligibility for remission. The court examined the meaning of the term "extinguish" and whether it only affected the applicant's eligibility for remission at the time of her release or if it also affected her capacity to become eligible for future remission.

The court held that the term "extinguish" means to "destroy, abolish, annihilate" and that the legislature intended prisoners who fell within s 207(B)(1)(a), (b) or (c) to suffer the consequences of s 207B(2). The court found that the applicant's eligibility for remission was extinguished when she was granted leave of absence to work under s 61(1)(b) of the Corrective Services Act. The court also found that the applicant's argument that the extinguishment applies only in respect of eligibility prior to 16 December 1996 or that she may become eligible from 11 January 1999 was not supported by the wording of the section.

The court dismissed the application and held that prisoners who have applied for and been granted release into the community in the circumstances set out in s 207B(1) will be required to serve the whole of the sentence imposed upon them without remission. The court found that the applicant's eligibility for remission was extinguished by the amendment to the Corrective Services Act 1988 and that there was no basis for making any of the declarations sought in the application.