The appellant (W) appealed against a decision of a district judge to make an extradition order in favour of the respondent requesting state, Poland. The sole issue before the district judge was whether it was unjust or oppressive for the purposes of the Extradition Act 2003 s.25 to order W's extradition in light of psychiatric evidence that W would commit suicide if returned. The district judge found that it was not oppressive and ordered his extradition. Appeal allowed. (1) In determining wheth ...
|
The court was required to determine the consequences of a failure to extradite a person to a Category 1 territory within the required period following an unsuccessful appeal to the High Court against an order for extradition. The appeals of the three applicants (K, B and W) against extradition to the respondent requesting states under the Extradition Act 2003 s.26 had been dismissed. There was then a failure to extradite them within the original period laid down by s.36(3)(a) of the Act. The Hig ...
|
S appealed against the District Judge's decision to grant A, an Australian citizen, conditional bail. D faces extradition to Sweden for offences of rape and sexual assault.HELD: Appeal dismissed. S appeals on the basis that no conditions can effectively ensure attendance and surrender. As Sweden is a Part 1 territory for the purposes of the Extradition Act 2003, there is no consideration of the strength of the case. No prima facie case has to be shown. Although A has weak community ties and has ...
|
SA appealed against the District Judge?s decision to grant D conditional bail. D faces extradition to SA for an offence of conspiracy to murder.HELD: Appeal dismissed. The Judge directed himself correctly. SA had to satisfy the Judge that there were substantial grounds for believing that D would fail to attend Court when required and that no conditions could meet those objections. It is not the role of the Court to consider guilt or innocence. The strength of the evidence may be of some assistan ...
|
S appealed the District Judge's decision to order his extradition to Poland. At the initial hearing, S raised issues pursuant to section 4 of the Extradition Act 2003: he had not been served with a Polish translation of the warrant. The Judge rejected these submissions and adjourned for an extradition hearing. At the extradition hearing, S sought to reopen section 4 on a different basis: the warrant had not been served on him as soon as practicable after his arrest. The Judge held there was no p ...
|
Application for an order under section 91 of the Extradition Act 2003:- Prior to the hearing of an appeal under section 103 of the Extradition Act 2003, the appellant sought to be discharged from the proceedings on health grounds. This was the second time that the appellant had sought such a discharge, the previous time the application was refused (Howes v HMA 2010 SLT 337). Section 91 provides:- "(1) This section applies if at any time in the extradition hearing it appears to the ...
|
The failure of the warrant to accurately depict the conduct for which the requested person’s return was sought rendered the warrant invalid. Applying the ratio from the decision in R. (on the application of Castillo) v Spain [2004] EWHC 1676 (Admin), [2005] 1 W.L.R. 1043 to the validity provisions of the Extradition Act 2003 s.2 in the context of the validity of European arrest warrants, courts in the United Kingdom should assess whether the conduct described in the warrant was a proper, fair an ...
|
The CPS, acting on behalf of the applicant Polish judicial authorities, applied to strike out appeals brought by the respondents against extradition orders. K's notices of appeal contained no grounds of appeal. The CPS submitted that the language of the Extradition Act 2003 s.26(4) meant that a notice of appeal that did not specify any grounds of appeal, or any grounds raising or purporting to raise a question under s.27(3) of the Act, was invalid. Application refused. (1) There was no statutory ...
|
The Appellant (C) appealed against a decision of the district judge ordering her extradition to the respondent requesting state, Poland. C had been convicted of five offences of burglary, one domestic and four commercial, in which a considerable amount of property had been stolen. By the time her conviction was upheld on appeal, she had moved to the United Kingdom, having left her son (J) in his grandmother's care. J joined C in the UK in 2008 when he was six years old. He exhibited some learnin ...
|
The Appellant (K) appealed against a decision of the district judge ordering his extradition to the respondent requesting state, Poland. K had been convicted in Poland of drugs offences and was sentenced to terms of six and 18 months' imprisonment. He did not surrender to custody but instead came to the United Kingdom. A European arrest warrant was subsequently issued, seeking his return to serve the outstanding prison sentence, and the district judge ordered his return to Poland. K contended th ...
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... |