Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court refuses to order the surrender of man to Poland on foot of a European Arrest Warrant, on the grounds that the warrant failed to satisfy the statutory requirements regarding trials in absentia.
European arrest warrant – custodial warrant – Polish authorities seeking respondent’s surrender – trial in absentia – minimum gravity – correspondence - further information - whether or not the respondent was afforded the opportunity to reopen the question of his guilt or innocence at the hearing of the application for a consolidated judgment - the issuing judicial authority stated that in an application for a consolidated judgment court does not re-examine the case or give a guilty or not guilty verdict - respondent did not receive the papers because they were returned following two attempts of service of the same upon him - surrender of the respondent is prohibited by s. 45 of the Act of 2003 - not in dispute that the respondent was not present for the hearings at which his guilt was determined in case reference numbers 218/03 and 388/03 – satisfied served in case 218/03 - case file reference 388/03 respondent was neither present in court, and nor are any of the circumstances set forth in the table to para. D of the EAW indicated as being of any application - as a general principle, where the Court finds that a person may not be surrendered for any one of the offences the subject of a consolidated sentence, it is not possible to order the surrender of the person concerned because it is not possible to disentangle the sentence in respect of which surrender has been found to be prohibited from the remaining offences - regard to the conduct of the respondent and his own lack of diligence in not attending court or arranging for representation in court in case reference 388/03 - additional information provided states that the decision to charge the respondent was made on 29th July, 2003, and on the same day charges were presented to him personally – statutory interpretation - requirement of s. 45 of the Act of 2003 have not been satisfied – surrender refused –
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.