Marcin Cwiklinski v Polish Judicial Authority
[2023] EWHC 2901 (Admin)
Jacek Smolarek v Polish Judicial Authority
14 November 2023
[2023] EWHC 2860 (Admin)
High Court
A man is wanted in Poland for a crime he committed almost 20 years ago. He's lived in the UK since 2006 and argues that extradition would violate his right to family life. A judge decided that while his family life is important, the need to bring him to justice in Poland is more important. The appeal to overturn that decision was denied.
Key Facts
- •Appellant (61) wanted for extradition to Poland for misappropriation of property in 2004 (value: ~£3,000).
- •Extradition arrest warrant issued in 2012, certified in 2022.
- •Appellant arrested in October 2022, extradition ordered in March 2023.
- •Appellant resided in the UK since 2006 with his wife and two adult children.
- •Polish authorities claim no culpable delay; potential delay attributed to Brexit and loss of SIRENE database.
- •Appellant claims payment of a fine in 2007 led to a false sense of security, but the Judge rejected this claim.
- •The Polish sentence is 10 months' custody.
- •The sole ground of appeal is Article 8 ECHR (right to private and family life).
Legal Principles
Article 8 ECHR (right to private and family life) balance sheet exercise in extradition cases.
ECHR
Consideration of passage of time in Article 8 assessments; fugitivity is a relevant factor.
HH v Italy [2012] UKSC 25
Outcomes
Permission to appeal refused.
The Judge's Article 8 balancing exercise was not demonstrably wrong. The passage of time, while considered, did not outweigh the public interest in extradition, particularly given the Appellant's fugitivity and the lack of culpable delay by the Polish authorities.
Adjournment application refused.
Alternative Counsel was available, and the delay was not justified given the circumstances.