Group Litigation Orders
Group Litigation Order
Ref No: 55
Name of Group Litigation Order: Lincoln Prison Group Litigation
Date of Order: 03/08/06
Judge: His Honour Judge Inglis
Court: Lincoln County Court
Managing Court: Lincoln County Court
Lead Solicitors:
Sills & Betteridge
46 Silver Street
Lincoln
LN2 1ED
DX 11025 Lincoln
Tel: 01522 510463
Fax: 01522 510463
Ref: SRW.HW.58821-3
Defining Issues: This Order applies to the following GLO issues in proceedings brought by prisoners or former prisoners against the Home Office arising out of a disturbance at Lincoln Prison on 23rd and 24th October 2002:
(1) The nature, extent and scope of any duty owed by the Defendants to the Claimants and whether such duty was discharged in the circumstances of the case
(2) Whether it was reasonably foreseeable that, in the event of a riot or disturbance, prisoners in different parts of the prison other than E Wing (the wing where vulnerable prisoners were located) would be targeted or be the subject of threats or violence
(3) Whether the keys or locks installed at the time of the riot in October 2002 were reasonable and adequate to discharge the duty of care owed to the Claimants
(4) Whether the failure to implement improvements in security recommended in May 2002 (principally the installation of KR locks at key points in the prison including access to residential accommodation in the event of an ordinary lock compromise) amounted to a breach of duty
(5) Whether there was any, or any adequate, contingency emergency evacuation plan for E Wing and whether any lack of, or a failure to implement, such a plan amounted to a breach of duty
(6) If the Defendants were in breach of duty in respect of issues (3) or (4) or (5), whether the outcome for (i) the Claimants on E Wing and (ii) the Claimants on other wings would have been different if the keys or locks installed had been adequate, or an adequate contingency emergency evacuation plan had been implemented
(7) The nature and extent of any duty to provide follow up counselling or psychiatric intervention for the Claimants
(8) If there was such a duty whether it was breached
(9) Whether the Claimants establish physical or psychiatric injury and causation
(10) Whether Articles 2 or 3 are engaged and whether they were violated. Whether a human rights claim (if limitation can be overcome) adds anything to the substantive allegations.