James Carter, recently released from HMP Manchester on licence, faced a set of restrictive probation conditions that prevented him from returning to work and threatened immediate recall. The matter engaged prison and probation law, public law remedies and human rights considerations.
What Happened
On release, Mr Carter was given a licence containing a nightly curfew, daily reporting requirements and wide-ranging travel restrictions. These measures were imposed by the local probation service in Manchester without a clear or documented risk assessment setting out why such severe restrictions were necessary.
Within weeks he lost a job opportunity because his curfew conflicted with shift patterns. Minor administrative lapses — late sign-ins caused by travel delays — prompted formal warnings and a latent threat of recall to custody. Concerned about fairness and proportionality, Mr Carter instructed Aldwych Legal to act urgently.
Legal Issues
- Whether the probation service had lawful authority to impose the licence conditions and whether they complied with statutory guidance from HMPPS and relevant probation regulations.
- Whether the conditions were proportionate and necessary in light of the client’s individual risk profile (principles of proportionality under the Human Rights Act 1998).
- Potential breaches of Article 8 ECHR (right to respect for private and family life) and the impact on freedom of movement and employment.
- Failure to follow basic public law duties of procedural fairness and the risk of Wednesbury unreasonableness/irrational decision-making.
Our Approach
We carried out a prompt review of the licence paperwork, risk assessments and decision notes supplied by the probation service. A detailed pre-action letter was sent under the Pre-Action Protocol for Judicial Review setting out the legal errors and inviting remedial action.
Our representation relied on HMPPS licence guidance, statutory sources and case law on proportionality and procedural fairness. We engaged in focused correspondence and negotiation with the probation office, making clear that we would pursue judicial review if the unlawful conditions were not withdrawn.
Outcome
The probation service agreed to remove the blanket curfew and travel bans and replaced them with tailored, time-limited conditions proportionate to Mr Carter’s assessed risk. The threat of recall was withdrawn and formal safeguards around reporting were clarified to avoid unfair punishment for minor administrative errors.
As a result, Mr Carter was able to accept employment offers and his day-to-day life returned to normal without further threat of unnecessary recall.
Result / Why It Matters
This matter shows how Aldwych Legal protects clients from unlawful and disproportionate supervision conditions, ensuring probation decisions respect statutory guidance, human rights and public law standards.
