Skip to content
© Copyright, Criminal Cases Review Commission 2026.

CCRC refers another two indeterminate sentences to the Court of Appeal, and raises a new area of concern  

Published:
  • 16 IPP cases referred by the Commission so far this year  
  • More than 250 IPPs/DPPs under review by casework teams   

The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) has referred to the Court of Appeal the indeterminate sentences of two men who are still in custody for robbery and wounding offences committed in 2007 and 2009.

These referrals are part of the Commission’s thematic, ongoing work to review IPP/DPP sentences.

Simeon Gamage was convicted at Wolverhampton Crown Court in 2010 for two robbery offences involving the theft of purses, mobile phones, cash and bank cards the previous year when he was 24. He pleaded guilty to one of the counts but was convicted of both. He received a sentence of imprisonment for public protection (IPP) with a minimum term of two years and six months.

Mr Gamage has attempted to appeal his sentence, but the Full Court found, in December 2007, that the sentence was neither wrong in principle nor excessive. He remains subject to his IPP and is still in custody. He applied to the CCRC in October 2025.

Harry Bees, then aged 17, was convicted at Middlesex Guildhall Crown Court in 2007 of conspiracy to rob and wounding with intent after he conspired with eight other individuals to rob rail network passengers of their belongings. He was sentenced to detention for public protection (DPP) with a tariff of five years, less 69 days spent on remand.

Mr Bees was also unsuccessful in appealing his sentence in November 2010, and he applied to the CCRC in July 2025.

Reviewing these cases, the CCRC has considered the impact of recent Court of Appeal judgments, in particular R v Williams [2024] EWCA Crim 686 and R v Davis & Others [2026] EWCA Crim 743 and has concluded that in each case there is a real possibility the Court will now find that the sentencing judges did not give sufficient weight to the age and immaturity of each applicant when assessing their dangerousness and future risk.

The Court has recently overturned several similar IPP/DPP sentences. On 23 April, two CCRC referrals were allowed and the sentences quashed, together with those in three other indeterminate sentence cases, see the indeterminate sentences of five IPP/DPP prisoners were quashed.

CCRC Chair Dame Vera Baird KC said: “We continue to refer IPP and DPP sentences, about which there are areas for concern, as quickly as we can to the appeal courts.

“Mr Gamage was a relatively young man when convicted and Mr Bees was still a child.

“In these two cases, The CCRC also raises the additional issue that sentencing judges each had the option of imposing an extended determinate sentence instead of the IPP or DPP. We think there is a real possibility that the Court of Appeal will find that they should have done so.”

IPP (Imprisonment for Public Protection) sentences were indeterminate sentences intended for serious offenders who were considered dangerous to the public.

DPP (Detention for Public Protection) sentences were similar indeterminate sentences imposed on people aged under 18 who were considered dangerous.

Both types of sentences were abolished in 2012, but current IPP and DPP prisoners have not been freed from the terms imposed on them before abolition. 

[ENDS] 

Notes to Editor:    

  1. The CCRC is an independent body set up under the Criminal Appeal Act 1995. It is responsible for independently reviewing suspected and alleged miscarriages of criminal justice in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. It is based in Birmingham and is funded by the Ministry of Justice.       
  2. There are currently 16 Commissioners who bring to the CCRC considerable experience from a wide variety of backgrounds. Commissioners are appointed by the monarch on the recommendation of the Prime Minister in accordance with the Office for the Commissioner for Public Appointments’ Code of Practice.    
  3. The CCRC received more than 1,800 applications for reviews (convictions and/or sentences) last year. Since starting work in 1997, the CCRC has referred more than 900 cases to the appeal courts.       
  4. The CCRC considers whether, as a result of new information or a new argument on a point of law, there is a real possibility that the sentence would not be upheld were a reference to be made. New information or argument on a point of law is argument or information which has not been raised during the original sentence hearing or on appeal.  Applicants should usually have appealed first. A sentence can be referred in the absence of an earlier appeal only if there are “exceptional circumstances”.      
  5. If a case is referred, it is then for the appeal court to decide whether the sentence should be changed.         
  6. More details about the role and work of the Criminal Cases Review Commission can be found at www.ccrc.gov.uk. The CCRC can be found on X, Facebook, Instagram (@the_ccrc) and Linkedin.