Dempsey v Minister for Justice

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Court: High Court
• Judge: Mr. Justice Morris
• Judgment Date: 21 January 1994
• Neutral Citation: 1994 WJSC-HC 330
• Docket Number: 333 J.R./1993
• Date: 21 January 1994

1994 WJSC-HC 330

THE HIGH COURT

333 J.R./1993

DEMPSEY v. MIN JUSTICE

JUDICIAL REVIEW

BETWEEN

ANTHONY DEMPSEY

APPLICANT

AND

THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE

RESPONDENT

Citations:

PRISONS RULES 1947

PRISONS (IRL) ACT 1907

WEBB V IRELAND & AG 1988 IR 353

AMALGAMATED PROPERTY CO V TEXAS BANK 1982 QB 84

CRIMINAL JUSTICE ADMINISTRATION ACT 1914 S17(3)

CRIMINAL JUSTICE ADMINISTRATION ACT 1914 S43

ADAPTATION OF ENACTMENTS ACT 1922 S11

MCLOUGHLIN, APPL OF 1970 IR 197

DEVITT V MIN FOR EDUCATION 1989 ILRM 639

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION ACT 1930 S23(2)

GREEN DALE BUILDING CO, IN RE 1977 IR 264

TARA PROPERTIES LTD V MIN FOR ENERGY 1993 ILRM 771

Synopsis:

CRIMINAL LAW

Sentence

Imprisonment - Period - Duration - Prisoner - Remission - Entitlement - Sentence served in various prisons - Minister's power to order transfers - Varying rates of remission allowed in different prisons - Prisoner's legitimate expectation of maximum rate - Minister of State - Exercise of statutory discretion - Exercise of discretion not affected by rules of estoppel - Rules for the Government of Prisons, 1947 (S.R. & O. No. 320) - Criminal Justice Administration Act, 1914, ss. 17, 43 - (1993/333 JR - Morris J. - 21/1/94) - [1994] 1 ILRM 401

|Dempsey v. Minister for Justice|

EVIDENCE

Estoppel

Minister of State - Order - Statute - Power - Exercise - Discretion - Prisoner - Transfer to another prison - Estoppel not applicable to exercise of statutory discretion - (1993/333 JR - Morris J. - 21/1/94) - [1994] 1 ILRM 401

|Dempsey v. Minister for Justice|

1 Judgment of Mr. Justice Morris delivered the21st day of January 1994.

2 In this case the Applicant was sentenced to two terms of imprisonment. The first was for a period of six years and this sentence was imposed on the 4th of July 1988. The second term was for a period of eight years and this was imposed approximately one month later on the 2nd of August 1988. While he has been serving these sentences he has been detained in a number of prisons. From the 4th of July 1988 to the 31st of August 1990 he was detained in Mount joy Prison. He was then transferred to Cork Prison and on the 7th of January 1991 he was transferred to Wheatfield Place of Detention and then on the 19th of May 1992 he was transferred to Portlaoise Prison. On the 19th of November 1992, he was transferred to Shelton Abbey and on the 21st of December 1992 to a training unit. On the 13th of April 1993 he was transferred back to Wheatfield Prison.

3 Under the Rules for the Government of Prisons 1947 made pursuant to the Prisons Ireland Act 1907 a convicted person "shall be entitled by industry and good conduct to earn a remission of a portion of his imprisonment not exceeding one fourth of the whole sentence provided that the remission so granted does not result in the prisoner being discharged before he has served one month".

4 The parties to this application have agreed that in the case of Portlaoise Prison and Shelton Abbey the remission has been increased from one quarter to one half. This arrangement does not appear to have any statutory authority. However, it is accepted that such an arrangement exists with the approval of the Minister for Justice.

5 It is the Applicant's case that if he were now still in Portlaoise Prison or in Shelton Abbey, he would now be due for release by virtue of the 50 remission, whereas by reason of the fact that he has been transferred back to Wheatfield Prison, where the ordinary ¼ remission applies, his full time would not yet have been served. He is, as a result of the transfer, being deprived of his liberty, he claims.

6 The Applicant bases his case on two broad principles:-

7 (a) It is the Applicant's case that upon his being admitted to Portlaoise Prison on the 19th of May 1992 (and transferred to Shelton Abbey on the 19th of November 1992) he had a legitimate expectation that he would be released from prison at the expiration of his term having obtained a credit of 50. He says that his removal from Shelton Abbey on the 21st of December 1992 was a denial of this legitimate expectation. Furthermore he claims that by virtue of his good conduct and industry, while he was in Portlaoise Prison and Shelton Abbey, he earned the right to his 50 remission and this right, which incorporates his right to be set at liberty, cannot now be legitimately taken away from him.

8 For the Applicant to succeed, in my view it would have to be established that he had a legitimate expectation that he would never be moved from Portlaoise Prison or Shelton Abbey. It may well be that the Applicant was reasonable in assuming and expecting that so long as he remained in Portlaoise Prison or in Shelton Abbey he would be entitled to such benefits as to remission rights as would flow from being in these establishments. I am satisfied, from an examination of the documents furnished to me during the course of the...