Leszek Gwiazdecki v Polish Judicial Authority
[2023] EWHC 1539 (Admin)
Lukasz Ratajewski v Polish Judicial Authority
5 June 2024
[2024] EWHC 1359 (Admin)
High Court
A man facing extradition to Poland for serious crimes appealed a bail refusal. Even though he presented evidence of family ties and a successful business, the judge was not convinced he wouldn't flee. His past actions of leaving Poland after a previous conviction and living under a false name for 20 years were key factors in the decision to deny bail.
Key Facts
- •Appellant arrested and denied bail multiple times in Magistrates' Court and High Court.
- •Appellant appeals bail refusal in High Court, raising jurisdictional issues.
- •Appellant faces extradition based on a conviction and accusation warrant from Poland.
- •Appellant maintains his innocence and argues for bail based on family ties, business interests, and the detrimental effects of continued incarceration.
- •Appellant has lived in the UK under a false identity for 20 years.
- •Accusation warrant involves serious allegations, including conspiracy to murder.
Legal Principles
Section 22(1A) of the Criminal Justice Act 1967: Bail application based on substantial grounds for believing the appellant would fail to surrender.
Criminal Justice Act 1967
Schedule 1 Part 2A §3 of the Bail Act 1976: Subsequent bail hearings need not rehear previously heard arguments.
Bail Act 1976
High Court's inherent jurisdiction to control repeat bail applications.
High Court precedent
R v Slough Justices, ex p Duncan (1982) 75 Cr App R 384: Interpretation of 'change of circumstances' in relation to repeat bail applications.
R v Slough Justices, ex p Duncan
R v Blyth Juvenile Court, ex p G [1991] Crim LR 693: Determining sufficient difference in arguments for fresh bail consideration.
R v Blyth Juvenile Court, ex p G
Kowalski v Poland [2021] EWHC 323: Jurisdictional considerations concerning repeated bail applications in extradition cases.
Kowalski v Poland
Presumption in favor of bail for accusation warrants, no such presumption for conviction warrants.
Extradition Law
Outcomes
Bail refused.
Substantial grounds exist to believe the appellant would fail to surrender due to his history of avoiding accountability (leaving Poland after conviction, using a false identity for 20 years), the seriousness of the accusations against him, and the perceived fragility of his ability to successfully resist extradition.