More prisoner compo cases likely

Despite being on the losing end of a trail of court decisions, the Department of Corrections may still challenge compensation claims by inmates held too long in custody.

However, prisoners’ lawyer Douglas Ewen expected most future claims would be settled by direct negotiations, and those that did reach the courts would likely be over disputes in the amount of compensation offered, rather than eligibility.

A Corrections Department spokeswoman said estimates of the number of prisoners eligible for claims, and the potential costs of those claims, were unknown.

In the latest court decision, issued from the Court of Appeal on December 18, Corrections lost an argument that a 2016 Supreme Court interpretation of the law did not apply to inmates who had already left prison.

It was an attempt to avoid paying compensation for unlawful imprisonment after it was found the way release dates had been calculated for about 13 years had been wrong. It affected prisoners who spent time in custody before being sentenced.

Corrections had applied the law as it was set out in an earlier court decision but in 2016 the Supreme Court ruled that the earlier case had been wrongly decided.

About 20 prisoners had to be released immediately and 500 others had their release dates brought forward. Thousands more may have spent too long in jail over the previous 13 years.

One man who took a case to the Supreme Court to establish that Corrections had been miscalculating release dates, Michael Marino, has already settled his claim at the High Court for $50,000 after he was held 127 days too long. According to the Supreme Court judgment, he was jailed for 22 months in 2015 on charges of family violence and attempting to pervert the course of justice.

The case of Shane Arron Gardiner went on as a test case for compensation at the Court of Appeal and he was awarded $10,000 for being held 30 days too long.

Corrections chief legal advisor Katie Elkin said the decisions in the Gardiner and Marino cases provided Corrections and potentially claimants with clarity of the legal principles that may apply in other cases. ‘‘Corrections believes there was little to be gained by seeking leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.’’

‘‘Corrections’ method of calculating pre-sentence detention had been confirmed in previous court rulings. Previous rulings of the High Court and Court of Appeal in the Marino case also upheld our practices.’’

Elkin said no court had criticised Corrections for its conduct. The potential cost to Corrections and the number of prisoners affected was difficult to calculate.

‘‘Further claims will be considered individually, and some may go before the courts.’’

‘‘While we are not appealing the latest decision of the Court of Appeal, future proceedings can not be ruled out.’’

The department had insurance for unlawful detention, and had advised the Treasury, and flagged potential liabilities in their annual accounts.

Ewen said it was up to the prisoners to make a claim. But he expected many would not, saying instead ‘‘this is a period of my life I would prefer to put behind me’’.

Before they received compensation, it was expected their victims would have a chance to make a claim against that money.

Further claims will be considered individually, and some may go before the courts. Department of Corrections chief legal advisor Kate Elkin