Vinter v United Kingdom
A whole life sentence is compatible with article 3 only if there is a prospect of release and a possibility of review, which must be known to the prisoner at the outset.
Facts
Mr Vinter and two other prisoners were serving whole life orders for murder, which meant that they would never be released, unless the Secretary of State exercised his discretion to release them on compassionate grounds, which in practice was limited to prisoners who were terminally ill or seriously incapacitated. They claimed that their sentences amounted to inhuman and degrading punishment, because they had no hope of release.
Legal principle
The Grand Chamber held that there had been a violation of article 3. The court said that a whole life sentence is compatible with article 3 only if there is both a prospect of release and a possibility of review, so that the domestic authorities can consider whether any changes in the prisoner are so significant, and such progress has been made towards rehabilitation, that continued detention can no longer be justified on legitimate penological grounds. The law in England and Wales was unclear on this point. The Court of Appeal later held in R v McLoughlin that the Secretary of State's power of release must be exercised compatibly with article 3, and the Grand Chamber accepted in Hutchinson v United Kingdom that this was sufficient.
Related cases on prohibition of torture and inhuman treatment (article 3)
- A v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2) [2005] UKHL 71, [2006] 2 AC 221
- A v United Kingdom (1999) 27 EHRR 611
- AM (Zimbabwe) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] UKSC 17, [2021] AC 633
- Chahal v United Kingdom (1997) 23 EHRR 413
- Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v DSD [2018] UKSC 11, [2019] AC 196
- Gäfgen v Germany (2011) 52 EHRR 1
- Ireland v United Kingdom (1979) 2 EHRR 25
- R (AAA) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] UKSC 42
Studying human rights law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
