Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Transfer of prison officer did not breach natural and constitutional justice
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court refuses application for judicial review of a decision to transfer the applicant to a different part of the Prison Service, finding that: (a) the proceedings were not moot where there was an undisputed causal connection between the applicant’s retirement and the transfer decision, though the position would no doubt have been different if the applicant’s retirement had had little or nothing to do with the impugned transfer; but (b) the transfer was not the type of decision that required the respondent to give the applicant notice or an opportunity to make submissions in the sense in which those rights were normally understood in the context of natural and constitutional justice.
Application for judicial review of the respondent's decision to transfer the applicant from the Operational Support Group to the Prison Service Escort Corps - applicant had not applied for the transfer, did not wish to be transferred and was given seven days' notice of the transfer - applicant took early retirement after and as a consequence of the transfer - reason for transfer in dispute - respondent's contention that transfer was for operational reasons only - applicant's contention that it was in substance or in effect a sanction - claim not brought under employment law provisions but based on breach of constitutional rights - whether decision to transfer the applicant was taken in breach of principles of natural and constitutional justice - whether the proceedings, including in respect of the declaratory relief sought, were moot where the applicant had retired - whether respondent had a contractual entitlement to transfer the applicant.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
