High Court quashes Secretary of State’s decision to keep prisoner in Category A conditions without an oral hearing

This was a successful challenge to the decision taken on behalf of the Secretary of State for Justice that the Claimant prisoner should remain a Category A prisoner and that his Category A review should be concluded without an oral hearing. The effect of the Secretary of State’s decision had been to severely curtail the Claimant’s residual liberties and significantly impacted on his prospects of release. 

In [2025] EWHC 273 (Admin), the High Court found that the approach taken was procedurally unfair and in breach of the Defendant’s published policy on the review of Category A prisoners. 

An oral hearing ought to have been held in order to explore (a) unproven security allegations against the Claimant, which were entirely at odds with the other overwhelming positive reports regarding his progress, and (b) the reliability of positive expert reports recommending the Claimant’s downgrade. 

Daniella Waddoup was instructed by William Kenyon of ITN Solicitors and assisted by Gabrielle Law of ITN Solicitors.