High Court quashes a decision of the Parole Board.

In R(AA) v Parole Board [2025] 997 EWHC (Admin) the High Court considered whether it was procedurally unfair for the Parole Board to deny a prisoner an oral hearing, in the circumstances where he had been recalled for matters that remained under police investigation.

The Claimant disputed matters which led to his recall. A panel member of the Parole Board held that it was ‘premature’ to direct an oral hearing as a police investigation was still ongoing and the outcome of it would be relevant to the Board’s risk assessment.

The High Court found that this was procedurally unfair as:

• a number of the classic Osborn principles were engaged
• a decision to grant an oral hearing is separate to a decision to list it
• the Board has wide case management powers to request further information and to manage the case
• by stating that an oral hearing was premature the Board had failed to discharge its important duty to make a decision about the appropriateness of the recall,
• the Board delegated the issue of whether fairness required a hearing to the Secretary of State, by asking it to re-refer the case once the outcome of the police investigation was known.

Michael Bimmler represented the Claimant on the papers. Stuart Withers represented the Claimant at the substantive hearing. They were instructed by Scott Laing of Bhatia Best Solicitors.