Michael Lomas v Republic of South Africa (No 3)
[2024] EWHC 1141 (Admin)
Michael Lomas v Republic of South Africa (No 4)
27 June 2024
[2024] EWHC 1642 (Admin)
High Court
Mr. Lomas is fighting extradition to South Africa due to health concerns. Earlier concerns about his bowel condition were dismissed. However, new evidence about his mental health and suicide risk will be heard at a special hearing to decide if extradition would be inhumane or oppressive.
Key Facts
- •Multiple applications for permission to appeal against extradition to South Africa.
- •Concerns regarding the appellant's physical and mental health, including suicide risk and fitness to fly.
- •Previous applications addressed physical health (diverticulitis, bloody diarrhoea), fitness to fly, and mental health.
- •New evidence submitted regarding worsening mental health and suicide risk, supported by psychiatric reports.
- •Applications made under s.108(5)-(8) of the Extradition Act 2003 and CrimPR 50.27.
- •Interim measures applications to the European Court of Human Rights were declined.
Legal Principles
Article 3 ECHR (inhuman or degrading treatment) and s.91 Extradition Act 2003 (oppression) high thresholds.
Various judgments in the Lomas v South Africa series
Assessment of fitness to fly as a question for the court in extradition proceedings.
Lomas v South Africa (No.2)
Test for oppression in relation to suicide risk: whether the risk of suicide, despite appropriate arrangements, is sufficiently great due to a mental condition removing the capacity to resist the impulse to commit suicide.
Turner v USA [2012] EWHC 2426 (Admin), Fletcher v India [2021] EWHC 610 (Admin), Modi v India [2022] EWHC 2829 (Admin)
Consideration of suicide risk at Stages 1 (pre-transfer), 2 (transfer), and 3 (post-transfer).
Various judgments in the Lomas v South Africa series
Outcomes
Fourth application regarding physical health and fitness to fly dismissed.
Substance was a re-run of points addressed in the Fourth Judgment; evidence did not arguably cross the thresholds of Article 3 and s.91.
One-day rolled-up hearing directed to consider dual application (s.108 and CrimPR 50.27) based on mental health and suicide risk.
New evidence presented meets the high threshold derived from case law; further consideration of whether suicide risk arises from extradition, whether suicide would be voluntary, appropriate steps identified, and whether the risk is sufficiently high to constitute oppression.