||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 288 (Feb)
||Queen's Bench Division, Administrative Court (London)
Mitting J (judgment given extempore)
||21 February 2013
Extradition - Extradition order - Appeal - Appellant being convicted by Belgian court in absentia - Appellant subsequently participating in hearing before Belgian court of appeal - Appellant's extradition being ordered - Appellant appealing - Whether appellant being convicted in his absence - European Convention on Human Rights, arts 5 and 6 - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, art 47.
Extradition Extradition order. The appellant was convicted by a Belgian court in his absence. He was subsequently present and represented before the court of appeal, which confirmed his conviction. His extradition was sought, but he opposed in on the basis that he had been convicted in his absence. The Administrative Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the appellant had been convicted in his presence as he had participated in a hearing before the Belgian court of appeal.
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases