The defendant sought to appeal against an order for his extradition. He now sought leave to bring judicial review against of the refusal of the court office to accept his notice had been defective, being out of time.
Held: Judicial review was not the appropriate way to challenge such a decision. Permission to apply was refused. However, the court observed obiter, that ‘service would be defective if an unsealed copy of the notice were served within the seven-day period, provided of course that it were in identical terms to the notice as filed. Even if service of an unsealed copy is technically defective, it may well be that the remedial power in CPR rule 3.10 could be invoked to cure the defect without offending the strict requirements of the 2003 Act.’
Judges:
Richards LJ, Maddison J
Citations:
[2009] EWHC 18921 (Admin)
Links:
Statutes:
Cited by:
Cited – Lukaszewski v The District Court In Torun, Poland SC 23-May-2012
Three of the appellants were Polish citizens resisting European Arrest Warrants. A fourth (H), a British citizen, faced extradition to the USA. An order for the extradition of eachhad been made, and acting under advice each filed a notice of appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Extradition, Judicial Review
Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425529