Sleiman v Commissioner of Corrective Services

In the case of Sleiman v Commissioner of Corrective Services, the appellant, Mr. Sleiman, sought judicial review of decisions made by the respondent, the Commissioner of Corrective Services, concerning his segregation under section 10 of the Corrective Services Act. Mr. Sleiman challenged the legality of his segregation, arguing it was not essential and that the effect of non-compliance with the segregation direction was unlawful. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria.

The court was tasked with determining whether the segregation direction issued under section 10 was essential, as well as the legality of Mr. Sleiman's placement in special units and the extent to which his residual liberty was restricted. Additionally, the court examined whether Mr. Sleiman's confinement in these units constituted a "prison within a prison" and whether administrative law relief was available to him. Furthermore, the court assessed if Mr. Sleiman had been falsely imprisoned by being kept in these units.

The court found that the segregation direction was not essential, and the effect of non-compliance did not amount to an unlawful restriction of liberty. It was determined that Mr. Sleiman's placement in the special units did not constitute a "prison within a prison" but rather a reasonable measure to manage his behaviour. The court held that administrative law relief was available to Mr. Sleiman, and he was not falsely imprisoned. Consequently, the court dismissed Mr. Sleiman's application for judicial review.