R (West) v Parole Board

The appeals in R (West) v Parole Board concerned the procedures followed by the Parole Board when a prisoner released on licence sought to resist revocation of his licence. The appellants argued that a prisoner in such a situation should be offered an oral hearing at which the prisoner could present his case, unless the prisoner chose to forgo such a hearing. The Parole Board accepted that in resolving challenges to revocation of their licences by determinate sentence prisoners it was under a public law duty to act in a procedurally fair manner, but resisted any rule or presumption in favour of an oral hearing. The House of Lords considered the arguments based on the common law and on articles 5 and 6 of the European Convention. The Lords found that the common law duty of procedural fairness required the Board to hold an oral hearing in cases where a determinate sentence prisoner resisted recall, if he did not decline the offer of such a hearing. The Lords concluded that the Parole Board had breached its duty of procedural fairness owed to the appellant by failing to offer him an oral hearing of his representations against revocation of his licence. The Board was accordingly in breach of article 5(4) of the Convention. The Board must pay the costs of the appellant in the House and below. The parties are invited to make written submissions within 14 days on the appropriate costs order in the case of the other appellant.