Lukasz Adrian Dobrowolski v District Court in Bydgoszcz, Poland
[2023] EWHC 763 (Admin)
Justyna Wyrebek v Circuit Court, Gliwice, Poland
27 April 2023
[2023] EWHC 951 (Admin)
High Court
A woman was ordered to be sent back to Poland for fraud, but a judge decided against it because she has mental health problems and a learning disability, and going to prison in Poland could make her mental health much worse.
Key Facts
- •Justyna Wyrebek appeals an extradition order to Poland for eight fraud offences committed between May and July 2009.
- •She pleaded guilty in Poland, received a suspended sentence, and later failed to appear to serve the activated sentence.
- •Extradition was resisted on the grounds that the EAW was not issued by a judicial authority and that extradition would be disproportionate to her Article 8 rights.
- •The appellant has diagnosed psychiatric problems and mental health issues, including depression and a potential learning disability.
- •New medical evidence from Dr. Wain confirmed a borderline learning disability and highlighted the risks of exploitation and mental health deterioration in a Polish prison.
- •The district judge initially rejected the medical evidence of Dr Singh, expressing skepticism about the diagnosis of learning disability and its basis in self-reporting.
Legal Principles
Extradition Act 2003, Section 21: Extradition is barred if it would be a disproportionate interference with the individual's Article 8 rights.
Extradition Act 2003
Article 8 ECHR: Right to respect for private and family life. The court must balance the public interest in extradition against the potential interference with Article 8 rights.
European Convention on Human Rights, Article 8
Celinski balancing exercise: Weighing the public interest in extradition against the potential impact on the individual's Article 8 rights.
Polish Judicial Authorities v Celinski [2016] 1 WLR 551
Fenyvesi principle: Generally, fresh evidence not available at the initial hearing should not be admitted on appeal.
Fenyvesi principle (case not explicitly cited)
Extradition Act 2003, Section 25: Extradition is barred if it is unjust or oppressive by reason of the physical or mental health of the individual.
Extradition Act 2003
Outcomes
Appeal allowed; extradition order quashed.
Extradition would cause exceptional hardship due to the appellant's learning disability and mental health conditions, making it a disproportionate interference with her Article 8 rights. The new medical evidence, while potentially available earlier, was deemed admissible in the interests of justice.
Similar Cases
Ewa Andrysiewicz v Circuit Court in Lodz, Poland
[2024] EWHC 1399 (Admin)
Ireneusz Teodor Polom v Regional Court in Bydgoszcz (Poland)
[2024] EWHC 2708 (Admin)
Norbert Miernik v Sad Okregowy III Criminal Division In Kielce, Poland
[2024] EWHC 1457 (Admin)
Grzegorz Pabian v Circuit Court in Warszawa, Poland
[2024] EWHC 2431 (Admin)