In R(Harvey) Secretary of State for Justice [2026] EWHC 1765 (Admin) HHJ Jarman KC quashed a decision of the Secretary of State which refused to accept the advice of the Parole Board that the Claimant was suitable to be transferred to open conditions.
The Claimant had briefly admitted his guilt over 20 years ago because he was informed that maintaining his innocence might jeopardize his future chances of release. He later retracted that admission and has maintained his innocence since. During a psychological assessment he expressed survivor’s guilt. The psychological assessment noted that research suggested that denial in itself did not increase risk, and that if the Claimant had admitted his offending it was unlikely that he would have been recommended to engage with any additional intervention work. All professional witnesses recommended his transfer to open conditions at his hearing before the Parole Board. The Parole Board recommended that he should be transferred to open conditions.
The Secretary of State disagreed. In his decision he took a different view as to the Claimant’s risk and relied on what he assessed were inconsistencies in the Claimant’s account regarding his maintenance of innocence.
The Court held based on the evidence that Secretary of State’s decision did not contain a reasonable interpretation of what the Claimant had said, and was not one which either contemplated by the professionals or the Parole Board. The Secretary of State erred when it proceeded to refuse his transfer to open conditions on the basis that the purported inconsistencies had implications for the Claimant’s assessment of risk.
Stuart Withers represented the Claimant. He was instructed by Claire Brigham and Hannah Buchalter of Hodge Jones and Allen.
