Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2007] All ER (D) 217 (Jun)
Neutral Citation: [2007] EWHC 1370 (Admin)
Court: Queen's Bench Division (Divisional Court)

Laws LJ and Davis J

Representation Edward Fitzgerald QC and Steven Powles (instructed by Birnberg Peirce) for the appellant.
  Paul Garlick QC and Miss Melanie Cumberland (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) for Italy.
  David Perry QC (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Secretary of State for the Home Department.
Judgment Dates: 20 June 2007


Extradition - Request for extradition - Bar to extradition - Circumstances rendering it unjust or oppressive to extradite - Passage of time since commission of alleged offence - Number of requests issued for appellant's extradition - Appellant arrested in 1999 - District judge relying on assurance from deputy prosecutor appellant would not be subjected to harsh prison regime such as to violate his right not to be subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment - District judge ordering extradition - Whether unjust or oppressive to extradite appellant - , s 14.

The Case

Extradition Request for extradition. The district judge had been correct to send the appellant's case to the Secretary of State for him to decide whether the appellant should be extradited. When deciding whether there was a bar to extradition by reason of passage of time, the proper approach was straightforward; the starting point was the simple words of the statute namely whether 'it would be unjust or oppressive to extradite him by reason of the passage of time since he is alleged to have committed the extradition offence.' An overall judgment on the merits was required, unshackled by rules with too sharp edges. In the instant case, the appellant had not demonstrated that the passage of time would deprive him of a fair trial on any of the accusation charges upon which his extradition was sought. Nor would it be oppressive to return him.

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.