No evidence of arbitrariness in Minister’s refusal of enhanced remission

Judicial review - prisoner challenging the decision of the Minister for Justice refusing him enhanced remission - convicted of two offences - rape and sexual assault - sentenced to 7 years imprisonment in respect of the rape conviction and 5 years for the sexual assault - concurrent sentences - appeal refused - Director of Public Prosecutions appealed the sentence for undue leniency - Court of Criminal Appeal substituted the sentence to 10 years imprisonment with 3 years suspended - ordered 5 years post release supervision - law on remission - prisoner must engage in "authorised structured activity" - Minister must be satisfied that by virtue of that engagement a prisoner is less likely to reoffend and better able to reintegrate into the community - no engagement in offence focused work - decision to refuse enhanced remission - argued that the Minister's decision was unjust and arbitrary - lack of information provided to him in the course of the consideration of his application for enhanced remission - generic or blanket based approach which was adopted with regard to the application - denial of his guilt meant no offence focused work could be engaged upon - whether the application for enhanced remission received due consideration and in accordance with the principles of fairness - satisfied that the decision was made by the Minister - whether the requirement for offence focused work can be said to have been the sole focus of the Minister's consideration of the application for enhanced remission over and above the prisoner personal circumstances - Minister was entitled and indeed obliged to undertake a subjective examination of the factual information before her in order to satisfy herself in the proper exercise of her discretion that the prisoner had met the criteria for enhanced remission - sufficient factual information before the Minister for her to subjectively assess, as she was required to do in order to be satisfied whether or not the prisoner was less likely to re-offend and better able to reintegrate into the community - application was duly considered - review of the application could not in any sense be regarded as a blanket approach - addressed specifically to the prisoner's personal circumstances - decision arrived at does not offend against the principle of rationality - no evidence of arbitrariness or of an unjust approach - no fettering of the Minister's discretion.