swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
Extradition - From: 2004 To: 2004
This page lists 21 cases, and was prepared on 21 May 2019.
Pinto v Governor of Brixton Prison and another; Admn 2004 - [2004] EWHC 2986
Cartwright and Knowles v The Superintendant of Her Majesty's Prison and The Government of the United States of America [2004] UKPC 10; [2004] 1 WLR 902
10 Feb 2004
PC
Lord Steyn, Sir John Roch and Sir Swinton Thomas, Lord Hoffmann and Lord Rodger of Earlsferry dissenting
Commonwealth, Extradition, Litigation Practice
PC (Bahamas) A warrant for extradition had been held to be void, and the prisoners released. It was argued that the US government had no right of appeal. Held: Section 17(3) of the Court of Appeal Act was applicable. Lord Steyn said that "[t]he correct approach is to ask, against the relevant context, what the legal effect of the pronounced decision is." He concluded: "[The Court of Appeal's] view [that in substance the judge had been making an order for certiorari] is reinforced by the judge's conclusion that 'I find that the orders of committal are void'. The judge was in effect making a declaration that the orders of committal were void. From that decision it followed that the state was no longer entitled to detain the applicants. The judge had based his decision on judicial review. Accordingly there was a right of appeal against the critical order."
The dissenting minority said: "Even if the judge (contrary to his express statement) is to be treated as having made an order of certiorari, we do not see how that helps the applicants. That only means that he made two orders: a deemed order of certiorari and an actual order that habeas corpus should issue. The applicants may have been entitled to appeal against the first. But that does not enable them to set aside the order for release unless they can also appeal against the second."
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ]
Wellington v HM Prison Belmarsh and Another [2004] EWHC 418 (Admin)
23 Feb 2004
Admn
Extradition
Extradition Act 1989
[ Bailii ]
Sadutto v Hm Prison Brixton and Another [2004] EWHC 563 (Admin)
1 Mar 2004
Admn
Extradition
[ Bailii ]
Caddoux and Another v Bow Street Magistrates' Court; Admn 26-Mar-2004 - [2004] EWHC 642 (Admin)
Savvas v Government of Italy [2004] EWHC 1233 (Admin)
2 Jun 2004
QBD
Mr Justice Moses Kay, Lord Justice Kay
Extradition
[ Bailii ]
Castillo v Kingdom of Spain and Another [2004] EWHC 1676 (Admin)
12 Jun 2004
Admn
Extradition
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
David Grant v Director of Correctional Services and Another; The Director of Public Prosecutions [2004] UKPC 27
14 Jun 2004
PC
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, Dame Sian Elias
Commonwealth, Extradition
(Jamaica) The defendant had pleaded guilty to drugs offences in the US, and had fled to Jamaica. He appealed against a refusal of Habeas Corpus having been arrested and held for extradition. The Board considered its jurisdiction to hear such an appeal, since the provision in Jamaica law said that the decision of the Court of Appeal was final. Held: the power of the Board to grant special leave to appeal had also been abrogated.
1 Cites
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
Castillo v The Kingdom of Spain, the Governor of HM Prison Belmarsh [2004] EWHC 1672 (Admin)
13 Jul 2004
Admn
Justice Silber Lord Justice Thomas
Extradition
In an application to extradite the claimant, the court heard a complaint that the description of the conduct alleged in the request was not a fair description of that conduct. Two of the offences charged were of an attempt to cause really serious bodily injury to a police officer by the explosion of an explosive substance and the alleged murder of that police officer. Held: The description of the alleged conduct that was set out in the request was not proper, accurate or fair, in that it did not make clear that the policeman was in his house at the time and not near the car under which an explosive was being placed, or that the device was not a timed device but one which required a fuse to be lit. The application for habeas corpus therefore succeeded in relation to those two charges: (Thomas LJ) "....[I]t is in my view very important that a state requesting extradition from the UK fairly and properly describes the conduct alleged, as the accuracy and fairness of the description plays such an important role in the decisions that have to be made by the Secretary of State and the Court in the UK. Scrutiny of the description of the conduct alleged to constitute the offence alleged, where as here a question is raised about its accuracy, is not an enquiry into evidential sufficiency; the court is not concerned to assess the quality or sufficiency of the evidence in support of the conduct alleged, but it is concerned, if materials are put before it which call into question the accuracy and fairness of the description, to see if the description of the conduct alleged is fair and accurate."
Extradition Act 1989 7
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Sapstead v The Governor of HMP Belmarsh and Another [2004] EWHC 2352 (Admin)
29 Jul 2004
Admn
Extradition
Extradition Act 1989 11(3)(b)
[ Bailii ]
Bleta, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] EWHC 2034 (Admin); [2005] 1 WLR 3194
9 Aug 2004
Admn
Cran J
Extradition
Extradition of the defendant was sought so as to serve a sentence of imprisonment. Held: Use in the warrant of the actual words in the Act was not required. "Even if the actual words of the Act are not incorporated in the request, and even if there is no equivalent wording, in my view, at least in a clear case, it is permissible for the Secretary of State to look at the request itself and its supporting documents to see whether the matter is clear. Adopting a purposive interpretation of the 2003 Act, it seems to me that this is, in effect, an examination of whether the request contains the necessary statement." and "My conclusion is that it is only in a clear case that the Secretary of State should conclude, in the absence of a statement by the requesting state, that the relevant defendant is not only at large but unlawfully at large."
Extradition Act 2003 70
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
King's Prosecutor, Brussels v Cando Armas and Another [2004] EWHC 2019 (Admin); Times, 08 October 2004; [2005] 1 WLR 1389; [2005] 2 All ER 181
20 Aug 2004
Admn
Henriques and Stanley Burnton JJ
Extradition
The prisoner had argued that the alleged offence underlying the application for his extradition to Belgium had been committed in part in England, and was therefore not extradictable. The prosecutor appealed. Held: Part I of the 2003 Act was intended to be a complete code and part of the European arrest warrant scheme, intended to facilitate extradition between member states. Many offences are now transnational, and it would be highly regrettable if they were not extradictable. There was nothing in the language of s65 to exclude the applications of subsections (3) to (6) from being framework offences. 'The conduct' in 65(2) meant such of the conduct as constituted a criminal offence onder the law of the territory to which the Act was being applied, and the case was remitted to eth District Judge to apply that test. Section 65(2) to (6) formed a list, that conduct constituted an extradition offence if it fell within any of these subsections, which were not mutually exclusive, and that there was no reason to confine subsections (3) to (6) to non-framework list offences. The court construed "the conduct" in section 65(2) to (6) to mean "such of the conduct as constitutes a criminal offence (under the law of the category 1 territory)", and held that the present case fell within both (2) and (3) of section 65.
Extradition Act 2003 28 65(2) - Council Framework Decision on a European arrest warrant: COM/2001/0522 final - CNS 2001/0215
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Holmes v Governor of Brixton Prison and Another [2004] EWHC 2020 (Admin); Times, 28 October 2004
20 Aug 2004
Admn
Mr Justice Henriques and Mr Justice Stanley Burntonzz
Extradition, Crime
The applicant sought his release from imprisonment where he awaited extradition to Germany. He was suspected of an offence of deception. He said there was insufficient evidence that the offence alleged would be an offence here. The alleged offence involved having misused the passwords of others, which was the deception of a machine. Held: Davies v Flackett was not authority to say that a machine could not be deceived and an unauthorised access offence might have been charged in any event under the 1990 Act. Human beings were also deceived in this case, not just a machine. However 'credited' under the 1968 Act required an unconditional adjustment to the banker's balance, and a correspondening debit of which there was no evidence here. However the credit became unconditional, and judicial note was taken that banks do not credit one account without another being debited. The charge of obtaining a money transfer by deception was made out. Theft was also made out.
Extradition Act 1989 9(8)(a) - Theft Act 1968 15A 15B - Computer Misuse Act 1990 2
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Fernandes and others v Hm Prison Brixton and Another [2004] EWHC 2207 (Admin)
7 Oct 2004
Admn
Extradition
[ Bailii ]
Austins v Spain and Another [2004] EWHC 2693 (Admin)
12 Oct 2004
Admn
Extradition
[ Bailii ]
Holmes v Government of Portugal [2004] EWHC 2875 (Admin)
9 Nov 2004
Admn
Extradition
[ Bailii ]
Carlyle-Clarke v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] EWHC 2858 (Admin)
26 Nov 2004
Admn
Extradition
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Kila v HM Prison Brixton and Another [2004] EWHC 2824 (Admin)
2 Dec 2004
Admn
Extradition
[ Bailii ]
Raffile v Government of the United States of America [2004] EWHC 2913 (Admin)
2 Dec 2004
Admn
Extradition
Extradition Act 1989 104
[ Bailii ]
Travica v the Government of Croatia [2004] EWHC 2747 (Admin)
3 Dec 2004
Admn
Extradition
Extradition Act 1989 8(9)
[ Bailii ]
Handa, Regina (on the Application of) v Bow Street Magistrates' Court and Another [2004] EWHC 3116 (Admin)
17 Dec 2004
Admn
Extradition
[ Bailii ]
