On 13 March 2025, G4S Care and Justice Services Limited who operate HMP Oakwood, admitted the unlawful use of X-ray body scanners ‘XRBS’ at a judicial review hearing before Mrs Justice Hill at the High Court in Manchester.

The Claimant, Mr Horsfall, challenged HMP Oakwood’s local policy of randomly selecting 10% of prisoners attending visits for XBRS.  He challenged HMP Oakwood’s policy as being unlawful arguing it was not in accordance with the Secretary of State’s policy on the use of XRBS and was in breach of his rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

He successfully obtained interim relief in the form of an injunction preventing HMP Oakwood from subjecting him to XRBS prior to being granted permission to bring his claim for judicial review.

The day before the hearing, G4S disclosed correspondence with the Secretary of State for Justice from October 2024 to January 2025. That correspondence revealed that HMP Oakwood had the highest use of XRBS in the prison estate. The Secretary of State advised senior officials at HMP Oakwood that random scans of prisoner cohorts accessing visits were not permitted, in line with new guidance published in December 2024, and were not to be used in place of a full search.

The parties settled proceedings by consent. The terms of the order included a declaration that the use of XRBS on the Claimant on two occasions was unlawful. G4S agreed to pay the Claimant significant damages.

Mrs Justice Hill approved the terms of the order and expressed a concern that G4S had not complied with their duty of candour to the court. She ordered that by 27 March 2025 a senior representative is to produce an explanation as to why there was a delay in disclosing relevant material, and what training they have been provided on the duty of candour in judicial review proceedings.

The Claimant initially represented himself as a litigant in person and was granted permission. He subsequently instructed the Prisoners’ Advice Service and was represented by Stuart Withers at the substantive hearing.

Final Order AC-2024-MAN-000328 R (Horsfall) v G4S_Order of Hill J 13.3