Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

R v Sarjo Gjikola

[2024] EWCA Crim 207
A man pleaded guilty to drug offences. Later, he claimed he was forced to do it because he was a victim of human trafficking. A government body agreed he might be a victim, but the court didn't believe his story because it had too many holes. His appeal was rejected.

Key Facts

  • The applicant, a 27-year-old Albanian national, pleaded guilty to producing cannabis and possessing false Romanian identity documents.
  • He was sentenced to 27 months' imprisonment in October 2019.
  • He applied for an extension of time to appeal, claiming he was a victim of modern slavery and unaware of relevant evidence at the time of his plea.
  • The applicant's claim was supported by a conclusive grounds decision from the Single Competent Authority that he was a victim of trafficking.
  • The police found 133 cannabis plants, false identity documents bearing the applicant's photograph, and a car registered in one of the false names at his residence.
  • The applicant provided inconsistent accounts of his involvement, and his testimony to the court was deemed not credible.

Legal Principles

The court must respect a Single Competent Authority's conclusive grounds decision on modern slavery unless there is contradictory evidence or substantial reason to doubt it.

AAJ [2021] EWCA Crim 1278

Where hearsay evidence is unsatisfactory and untested, the applicant may need to give evidence to the court.

AAD [2022] EWCA Crim 106

To succeed in an appeal based on the Modern Slavery Act 2015, the applicant must show a possibility that he acted under compulsion due to slavery or exploitation.

Section 45(1) Modern Slavery Act 2015

The court considers whether a reasonable prosecutor would have continued the prosecution, considering all available evidence, including the potential for an abuse of process application.

Section 23 Criminal Appeal Act 1968

Outcomes

Application for extension of time and leave to appeal refused.

The court found the applicant's evidence not credible and concluded that a reasonable prosecutor would have proceeded with the prosecution even with the additional evidence. The court determined that the fresh evidence did not establish a defence under section 45 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015 or an abuse of process.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.