Riddler v Queensland State Parole Board

Riddler was convicted of a number of sexual offences and sentenced to 12 years imprisonment. Riddler was also declared to be a violent sexual offender. Riddler made an application for a statutory order of review of the decision of the Queensland State Parole Board to refuse his application for parole. Riddler argued that the Board had acted in accordance with a policy to refuse parole because he failed to complete a substance abuse course, and that the Board had acted contrary to the merits of the case by placing excessive and undue weight upon the issue of inaccurate information concerning his history of breaches and incidents. Riddler further argued that the Board did not give sufficient weight to the material supporting his application for parole, namely the fact that he had completed a substance abuse course in 1999.

The court was required to decide whether the Board had acted in accordance with a policy without regard to the merits of the case, whether the Board took irrelevant considerations into account, and whether the Board failed to take relevant considerations into account. The court found that the Board's decision was not based on a policy to refuse parole for failing to complete a substance abuse course, and that the Board had considered the merits of the case. The court found that the Board had taken into account relevant considerations in making its decision, and that it had not placed excessive and undue weight upon the issue of inaccurate information concerning Riddler's history of breaches and incidents. The court found that the Board had given sufficient weight to the material supporting Riddler's application for parole, namely the fact that he had completed a substance abuse course in 1999.

The court found that the Board had not acted contrary to the merits of the case, had not taken irrelevant considerations into account, and had taken all relevant considerations into account in making its decision. The application for judicial review was refused, and there was no order as to costs.