Joseph Nathaniel Williams v Spain
[2024] EWHC 435 (Admin)
Maria Nieves Hegazey v Concepcion Espejel Jorquera (Spain)
24 May 2024
[2024] EWHC 1280 (Admin)
High Court
A woman was ordered to be sent back to Spain to serve a prison sentence for fraud. She appealed, arguing it would severely worsen her mental health and put her at risk of suicide. The court agreed, saying her mental health concerns outweighed the need to send her to Spain. She will not be extradited.
Key Facts
- •Appeal against extradition of Maria Nieves Hegazey to Spain for forgery and misappropriation of funds.
- •Appellant is a 62-year-old Spanish national, living in the UK for over 30 years with strong family ties.
- •Appellant was convicted in absentia in Spain in 2018 and sentenced to 5 years imprisonment.
- •Appellant's mental health significantly deteriorated, including substantial suicide risk, impacted by extradition proceedings.
- •Appeal focused on Article 8 ECHR (right to respect for private and family life) and section 25 of the Extradition Act 2003 (unjust or oppressive extradition).
- •New medical evidence regarding Appellant's deteriorating mental health was admitted on appeal.
Legal Principles
Extradition must be compatible with Convention rights under the Human Rights Act 1998.
Section 21 of the Extradition Act 2003
Article 8 ECHR balancing exercise: interference with rights must be exceptionally serious to outweigh extradition's importance.
Norris v Government of the United States of America (No. 2) [2010] UKSC 9
Section 25 of the 2003 Act: Extradition must not be unjust or oppressive due to the individual's physical or mental condition.
Section 25 of the Extradition Act 2003
In determining 'oppression' or 'injustice', consider the gravity of the alleged conduct and the public interest in extradition.
The Government of the Republic of South Africa v Dewani (No. 1) [2013] 1 W.L.R. 82
High threshold for showing oppressive extradition due to physical or mental condition.
Mikolajczyk v Wroclaw District Court [2010] EWHC 3503
Guidance on suicide risk in extradition cases, considering measures during UK custody, transfer, and detention in the requesting state.
Wolkowicz v Regional Court in Bialystock, Poland [2013] EWHC 102
Appellate court respects first instance fact-finding unless clear errors exist; judgment considered as a whole.
Celinski and Wiejak v Olsztyn Circuit Court of Poland [2007] EWHC 2123 (Admin)
Outcomes
Appeal allowed; extradition quashed.
Extradition would be a disproportionate interference with the Appellant's Article 8 ECHR rights due to her significant mental health issues, substantial suicide risk, and the overall circumstances of the case.
Similar Cases
Ross Moore v Criminal Court No 4 In Malaga, Spain
[2024] EWHC 1458 (Admin)
Hans Kacerri v Government of Albania
[2024] EWHC 1954 (Admin)
BZQ v Overijssel District Court, Zwolle, Kingdom of the Netherlands
[2024] EWHC 2002 (Admin)
Grzegorz Pabian v Circuit Court in Warszawa, Poland
[2024] EWHC 2431 (Admin)