The Appellant (G) appealed against an order for his extradition to Italy for offences of attempted murder and unlawful possession of weapons, on the basis that he had been convicted in his absence, had not deliberately absented himself and would not now be guaranteed a full re-trial, in breach of his Article 6 Convention rights. HELD: Although the requesting authority had provided evidence that re-trial rights were discretionary they also confirmed that Italian law had been interpreted in compli ...
|
The Appellant (L) appealed against a decision of the Divisional Court dismissing his appeal against extradition orders made pursuant to a European Arrest Warrant. L’s extradition was sought for prosecution in Germany for offences of tax evasion. L challenged the validity of the European Arrest Warrant, pursuant to Section 2(4)(b) of the Extradition Act 2003, on the basis that it did not include details of two earlier European Arrest Warrants which had now been withdrawn. The Divisional Court had ...
|
The Appellant (N) appealed against an order for his extradition to Poland pursuant to Article 2 and 3 of the ECHR on the basis that he believed that if returned he would be at risk of physical attacks from a known and influential gang to whom he and a business partner owed money. N was sought by Poland for the purpose of prosecution for several offences including theft, robbery, wounding by stabbing and fraud. The requesting authority provided written confirmation that there was no connection be ...
|
The Appellant (S) appealed against the District Judge’s decision to send his case to the Secretary of State for a decision on whether or not his extradition should be ordered on the basis that he was convicted in absence, he was not deliberately absent and he would not now be entitled to a re-trial. His extradition was sought for the purpose of executing a twenty-year custodial sentence for offences of murder and illegal possession of a firearm. The Secretary of State ordered S’s extradition in ...
|
The Appellant (K) appealed against the decision of the District Judge not to order his discharge from proceedings concerning his extradition to Poland. K is a Polish national sought for the purpose of executing a ten-month custodial sentence for a transport safety offence in Poland. K was arrested pursuant to a European Arrest Warrant in July 2009. His extradition hearing was set for 22nd July but was subsequently adjourned on several occasions in order to allow K’s application for legal represe ...
|
The Appellant (L) appealed against an order for her extradition to Hungary on the basis of extraneous considerations, (Section 13), in that she is a lesbian of Roma origin. L contended that if extradited she would be at risk of discrimination and would not receive a fair trial (Article 6). L also raised Articles 3 and 8 of the ECHR on the basis that she was vulnerable to self-harm and had lived in the UK for four years with her partner and their two daughters. HELD: There was no merit in L’s cla ...
|
This was an appeal under section 103 of the Extradition Act 2003 where the appellant has made an application to have the appeal allowed on the ground that her mental condition is such that it would be unjust or oppressive to extradite her. The issue was not raised in the extradition hearing before the sheriff, however, the court here considered it appropriate for the issue to be raised. Section 91 of the Act applies where it appears to the judge that "the physical or mental condition of the pers ...
|
The appellant (X) appealed against a decision that he should be extradited to the respondent requesting state, Cyprus. A European arrest warrant had been issued in Cyprus for X's arrest in relation to allegations that whilst there he had, with three other men, withdrawn or attempted to withdraw money using false credit cards. The warrant set out seven categories of offences which X was accused of committing, including conspiracy for committing a felony. It stated that the warrant was linked to 2 ...
|
The appellant (H) appealed against the decision of a district judge to order his extradition to the respondent requesting state, the Czech Republic. The conduct relied upon in the European arrest warrant was that H was alleged to have filled his car with petrol and left the garage without paying for it. The value of the petrol was £20. H contended that the offence was too trivial to warrant extradition. He submitted that the Criminal Procedure Rules 2005, which applied in principle to extraditio ...
|
The appellant (S) appealed against a decision of a district judge to order his extradition to the respondent requesting state, Romania. S had received a suspended sentence of three years' imprisonment in Romania for an offence of theft based on his stealing 10 chickens from a neighbour. S then left Romania and, following the prosecution's appeal, his suspended sentence was annulled and replaced by one of three years' immediate imprisonment. S had no knowledge of that sentence until his arrest un ...
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 |