The High Court has granted Steven Penrose leave to challenge the decision to keep him in solitary confinement at Mountjoy Prison. The ruling allows a judicial review to proceed; it does not decide whether the confinement was lawful or award damages.
Mr Justice Barr delivered the judgment on 25 July 2023 after a contested leave application. Penrose, a lay litigant, sought to challenge his detention regime and raised other complaints about prison treatment. The court granted leave only in respect of an order of certiorari concerning the Governor’s decision to place him in solitary confinement.
Penrose alleged that he spent 23.5 hours a day in his cell, with limited exercise in a small enclosed yard without direct sunlight. He argued that there was no lawful basis for the regime and that it breached his rights. He also alleged mistreatment by prison staff, restrictions on family visits, interference with correspondence and obstruction of court applications. The respondents disputed those allegations.
The respondents argued that the application was defective, out of time in relation to older matters, and that several complaints were unsuitable for judicial review or could be pursued through prison complaint procedures. They said Penrose had received 118 disciplinary reports, known as P19s, and had not appealed them. Assistant Governor David Tracey said the restrictions were necessary and lawful, and that Penrose had access to exercise, visits, calls and correspondence under prison regimes.
The judgment noted that the records for 2023 showed three disciplinary incidents and sanctions, including restrictions on visits and calls. Those sanctions were due to end on 31 May 2023. The judge said the records did not appear to justify continued solitary confinement: the sanctions had expired and did not specifically impose solitary confinement. He left open whether the totality of the P19 reports since 2017 might support a lawful decision, describing that as an issue for another day.
The judge said confinement in a single cell for about 23 hours a day, with very limited exercise and no opportunity to mix with other prisoners, seriously interferes with a prisoner’s rights and must be supported by cogent evidence. He found that Penrose had crossed the low threshold for leave to challenge the Governor’s decision, which he considered a continuing decision and therefore not out of time.
The court reserved costs until trial and directed Penrose to serve his amended affidavit on the Chief State Solicitor within three weeks. The respondents were given six weeks after receiving it to file opposition papers. The matter was listed for mention on 11 October 2023. If the court later finds the confinement decision unlawful, it may direct a hearing to assess any damages; no such finding or award was made at this stage.