Extradition was sought of the defendant to Poland. The defendant challenged the validity of the European Arrest Warrant, saying that it listed offences for which he was sentenced to less than four month’s imprisonment, and that sufficient particulars had not been given. The court had aggregated the sentences.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The requirements of the 2003 Act had been satisfied. However the court certified a question for the House of Lords: ‘Does section 65(3)(c) of the Extradition Act 2003 require it to be shown that:
(a) a final sentence of imprisonment of four months or greater was imposed in respect of each offence, taken on its own, that is referred to in the European arrest warrant, or is it sufficient to show that:
(b) a sentence of four months or greater was imposed in respect of multiple offences, provided that such offences were the offences specified in the warrant and that the sentence arrived at by the court was an aggregated sentence reflecting the total criminality?’
Judges:
Leveson LJ and Stanley Burnton J
Citations:
[2007] EWHC 2080 (Admin)
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Pilecki v Circuit Court of Legnica, Poland HL 6-Feb-2008
The defendant appealed against an extradition order made under a European Arrest Warrant to ensure that he served a sentence of imprisonment in Poland. The warrant was in respect of several sentences, some of which were for more and some for less . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Extradition
Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.259642