An EAW had been issued against Z based on four convictions by Polish courts for which he had received aggregated sentences of 45 months, as recorded in the EAW. After Mr Zakrzewski had been brought before the District Judge (and the hearing of his case had been adjourned), an order had been made by the Polish court, on his application, replacing the aggregated sentences of 45 months with a cumulative sentence of 22 months. The court considered the need to state the period of imprisonment in an extradition request where the sentences would be aggregated.
Held: The appeal succeeded. Lloyd Jones J said that the information in the warrant must: ‘relate to the current operative sentence and not to earlier sentences which have been subsumed in an aggregated order. In determining whether the requirement of section 65 is satisfied, the court needs to know the total length of time which the court of the requesting state has ordered must be served in prison. In the present case, that is the aggregated order.’
Judges:
Lloyd Jones J
Citations:
[2012] EWHC 173 (Admin), [2012] 1 WLR 2248
Links:
Statutes:
Extradition Act 2003, Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Zakrzewski v The Regional Court In Lodz, Poland SC 23-Jan-2013
The appellant was subject to an extradition request. He objected that the request involved an aggregation of sentences and that this did not meet the requirement sof the 2003 Act. He had been arrested under the arrest warrant, but during his trial . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Extradition
Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450586
