Kamil Drzewiecki v Polish Judicial Authority
[2024] EWHC 1756 (Admin)
Extradition appeals are allowed only if the appropriate judge ought to have decided a question differently, and that different decision would have led to discharge.
Section 26 and 27(3)/(4) of the Extradition Act 2003
In Article 8 proportionality assessments, the public interest in extradition outweighs family rights unless consequences are exceptionally severe.
HH v Deputy Prosecutor of the Italian Republic, Genoa [2012] UKSC 25
A child's best interests are a primary consideration in Article 8 assessments but may be outweighed.
HH v Deputy Prosecutor of the Italian Republic, Genoa [2012] UKSC 25
Delay since the crime diminishes the weight of public interest and increases the impact on family life.
HH v Deputy Prosecutor of the Italian Republic, Genoa [2012] UKSC 25
If raising immigration position in an Article 8 balance, it must be fully formulated with relevant statutes, regulations and rules.
Hojden v District Court, Gorzow, Wielkopolski, Poland [2022] EWHC 2725 (Admin)
In Article 8 assessments, the court considers the counterfactual scenario – the likelihood of deportation if not extradited.
Gurskis v Latvian National Authority [2022] EWHC 1305 (Admin)
The prospect of early release in Poland is a factor to consider, but the court shouldn't usurp the Polish authorities' sentencing processes.
Sobczyk v Circuit Court in Katowice, Poland [2017] EWHC 3353 (Admin)
Appeal allowed; appellant discharged.
The judge found that the DJ wrongly gave little weight to Dablowski's immigration difficulties and the time served in custody. Considering these factors alongside the children's best interests and the relatively short remaining sentence, extradition was deemed disproportionate.
[2024] EWHC 1756 (Admin)
[2023] EWHC 2901 (Admin)
[2024] EWHC 381 (Admin)
[2024] EWHC 459 (Admin)
[2023] EWHC 2953 (Admin)