Jacek Smolarek v Polish Judicial Authority
[2023] EWHC 2860 (Admin)
Marek Pawlowski v Regional Court in Tarnow, Poland
19 September 2023
[2023] EWHC 2320 (Admin)
High Court
A man is wanted in Poland for a drug crime. He's lived in the UK and argues he shouldn't be sent back. A judge said he broke the rules in Poland and staying in the UK shouldn't stop him from serving his sentence, even though he's trying to get out of prison in Poland early. The judge didn't delay the decision even though the man's lawyers were late with some information.
Key Facts
- •Marek Pawlowski (Appellant), aged 35, is wanted for extradition to Poland to serve a two-year custodial sentence imposed in 2016 for drug offenses.
- •The sentence was originally suspended but activated in 2019 due to non-payment of punitive damages.
- •Pawlowski came to the UK in 2014, returned to Poland, and then returned to the UK in 2017 without permission from the Polish court.
- •He made several applications from the UK to cancel the punitive damages obligation.
- •The extradition was ordered by District Judge Tempia on 18 November 2022.
- •Pawlowski's main argument against extradition is based on Article 8 ECHR (right to private and family life).
- •A new payment of 2000PLN (£400) towards the punitive damages was made in April 2023.
- •Pawlowski's time in UK custody has now reached 16 months out of a 24-month sentence.
- •He has demonstrated good progress in prison and applied for early release in Poland.
- •The application for an adjournment was based on the delay in receiving information from HMP Wandsworth regarding his detention, causing a delay in the Polish early release application.
Legal Principles
Article 8 ECHR (right to private and family life)
European Convention on Human Rights
Extradition principles considering the proportionality of extradition in the light of the right to private and family life and other circumstances.
Dobrowolski v Poland [2023] EWHC 763 (Admin)
Outcomes
Application for adjournment refused.
The application was made late, and there was no sufficient justification for the delay. The early release application in Poland is a matter for the Polish authorities, and the court would not intervene.
Permission to appeal refused.
There is no realistic prospect that the Court would overturn the original decision on Article 8 grounds, considering the appellant's actions and the current circumstances.
Permission to adduce putative fresh evidence refused.
The fresh evidence is not decisive in changing the outcome of the case.