Catherine Bond has had recent success for one of her recalled IPP clients. The client had transferred to Catherine because he was concerned his hearing had not been relisted for many months after what was meant to be a two-week adjournment. Through repeated chasing, Catherine discovered an error had been made at the Parole Board and the client's case had not been put forward for listing. On identifying the error, the case was listed.
Non-disclosure was an issue in the case. The application had been granted in full by the Panel Chair and had gone unchallenged by the previous solicitors. Catherine disagreed with this approach and submitted an appeal, firstly to seek a variation of the time limit for the appeal under PBR 9, and then to challenge the non-disclosure decision in full, arguing that all information should be disclosed to her client.
The appeal was considered and allowed in full. PPCS decided not to withdraw the information so it became fully disclosable. This was a really important aspect to the client's case.
After a very drawn out review, release was directed for Catherine's client. On receipt of the decision, Catherine made a successful challenge to the wording of one of the conditions, and an amended decision followed swiftly afterwards.
Catherine's client was very happy with the outcome in his case.
This case is a good example of the proactive and tenacious representation provided by SL5 Legal.