Marcin Cwiklinski v Polish Judicial Authority
[2023] EWHC 2901 (Admin)
Michal Jagiellowicz v Regional Court In Elblag (Poland)
2 November 2023
[2023] EWHC 2751 (Admin)
High Court
A man is wanted in Poland for crimes he committed as a teenager. He now has a family in the UK. A judge decided it's wrong to send him back to Poland because the crimes weren't that serious, and it's been too long. His family life in the UK is more important.
Key Facts
- •Appellant appeals extradition order to Poland for activating a suspended sentence (1 year 6 months) for 2006 drug supply and 2009 fraud offences.
- •Appellant, now 33, committed offences as a youth (17 and 19).
- •Suspended sentence included compensation payment; Appellant partially paid.
- •Appellant lived in the UK since 2017, with wife and two children born in Poland and the UK.
- •District Judge ordered extradition, finding Appellant a fugitive.
- •Appeal granted based on arguable error in fugitive classification.
- •Appellant subsequently paid outstanding compensation.
- •Appellant's family life in the UK is well-established.
Legal Principles
Extradition must be compatible with Article 8 ECHR (right to private and family life).
Section 21(1) Extradition Act 2003
Appellate court reviews whether the District Judge made the wrong decision on proportionality, not just errors in reasoning.
Love v USA [2018] 1 WLR 2889
Weighty public interest in extradition, but this varies with crime seriousness and delay.
H(H) v Deputy Prosecutor of the Italian Republic [2013] 1 AC 338
UK court assesses seriousness of offence via comparison with UK sentencing guidelines; not to second-guess foreign sentencing.
Celinski & Ors [2016] 1 WLR 551
Outcomes
Appeal allowed; extradition refused.
Extradition disproportionately interferes with Appellant's family life, considering the minor nature of the offences, the significant delay, and the Appellant's established family life in the UK.