Key Facts
- •Appellant (born July 1988) wanted for extradition to Poland for two 2006 assaults committed when he was 17.
- •Assaults involved group violence, one included attempted robbery.
- •Appellant fled Poland in 2010 to avoid serving sentences (1 year and 2 years, later activated).
- •Extradition arrest warrant issued in March 2017, updated May 2021, certified December 2021, arrest May 2022.
- •Appellant established life in UK with partner and two children (one born in UK).
- •Appellant argues extradition breaches Article 8 ECHR (private and family life) due to delay and youth at time of offences.
- •Appellant cites Deaconescu v Romania [2023] EWHC 870 (Admin) as precedent.
- •Appellant's legal team submitted new materials late, including a Polish document about a potential sentence aggregation application.
Legal Principles
Article 8 ECHR (right to respect for private and family life)
European Convention on Human Rights
Balancing exercise between public interest in extradition and Article 8 rights.
Case law (Deaconescu v Romania, Stragauskas v Lithuania)
Consideration of age at time of offence, length of delay, and impact on family life in Article 8 balancing.
Case law (Deaconescu v Romania)
Outcomes
Appeal refused; permission to appeal denied.
Judge found that strong public interest in extradition, including Appellant's fugitivity, outweighed Article 8 concerns. The Judge considered all factors raised by the Appellant, including the long delay, youth at time of offences, and the family impact.
Permission to rely on late-submitted materials denied.
Materials submitted too late and without proper explanation; not considered decisive.