application for judicial review of parole decision
application dismissed
Quick Take
1Where an adverse comments letter raised the absence of 'confirmed' professional supports and the applicant was given an opportunity to respond, no denial of procedural fairness arose from the refusal notice relying on the same absence of confirmed supports; the legislative scheme prescribes no particular process and the procedure adopted was orthodox.
2A document not before the decision-maker (here a Justice Health post-release letter) did not give rise to a failure to make an obvious inquiry where its content, at its highest, confirmed only the applicant's intention to engage with a provider rather than confirming supports were in place, and nothing in the material before the decision-maker put the CPO on notice that further information existed.
3The delegate's refusal reasons, read together with the detailed departmental submission, disclosed an evident and intelligible justification; the delegate was entitled within her decisional freedom to place greater weight on community protection over matters favouring release, and the decision fell within the range of possible lawful outcomes.
