Kirby v The Prisoners Review Board

[2011] WASCA 149

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Administrative Law
2. › Judicial review
3. › Prisoners Review Board
4. › Suspension and cancellation of parole
5. › Whether breach of statutory notice and reasons obligations invalidated decisions
6. › Whether breach constituted jurisdictional error
7. › Sentence Administration Act 2003 (WA), ss 107B, 115, 115A
1. Administrative Law
2. › Procedural fairness
3. › Statutory exclusion
4. › Whether statute excluded procedural fairness from parole suspension and cancellation decisions
5. › Sentence Administration Act 2003 (WA), s 115
1. Administrative Law
2. › Fettering of discretion
3. › Inflexible policy
4. › Prisoners Review Board adopting blanket no-hearing rule
5. › Whether adoption of inflexible policy invalidated individual decisions
6. › Sentence Administration Act 2003 (WA), s 115
1. Administrative Law
2. › Reasons for decision
3. › Adequacy of reasons
4. › Whether statement of reasons sufficient to enable exercise of statutory right of review
5. › Sentence Administration Act 2003 (WA), ss 107B, 115A

Quick Take

The Board's obligation under s 107B to provide written notice of decisions and reasons is imposed on the Board itself and cannot be discharged by providing copies to the Department of Corrective Services. A statement of reasons must be adequate to enable the prisoner to exercise the statutory right of review under s 115A, including by identifying the information relied upon with sufficient particularity. However, breach of s 107B obligations does not constitute jurisdictional error and does not invalidate the Board's substantive decisions to suspend or cancel parole. The Board's adoption of an inflexible no-hearing policy is unlawful but does not invalidate individual decisions made under that policy.