Extradition
Experience and expertise are the pre-requisites when dealing with such a complex and technical area of the law as extradtion and as one of only several firms that regularly and confidently act in this complex field we are confident that the service we provide is second to none.
The starting point for all extradition proceedings as far as the client is concerned is arrest by a police officer and production to the only Court in the United Kingdom which deals with such matters, City of Westminster Magistrates' Court, in police custody normally within forty-eight hours of arrest. There is no interview at this stage and although access to a lawyer is permitted it is a right that is seldom exercised.
There is no doubt that for most people arrested under the Extradition Act 2003 the prospect of appearing before a Court, is often dwarfed by the prospect of being forced to return to a country where they may face an unfair trial, ill treatment and even torture. This is all whilst the proceedings including the arrest are conducted in a language that may not be their own. The extradition hearing is often the client's initial opportunity to discuss the proceedings and raise any objections that they may have to their extradition. This is no easy task as the legislation is complex and vast as are the cases that have interpreted it.
Our team of Extradition Solicitors will navigate through the complex legislation dealing with such requests and be able to provide comprehensive legal advice in a language that the client will understand. We offer clients the advice and assistance required to protect their interests when fighting an extradition request and recognise that such requests may have fundamental consequences for those on the receiving end.
Our team often appears before the most senior District Judges at the City of Westminster Magistrates' Court to deal with extradition proceedings. The following are just a small example of cases that our experienced team of Extradition Lawyers have dealt with :-
Miller – v Government of Canada [2021] EWHC 984 (Admin) – Sundeep was instructed in this renewed application for leave to appeal against an Extradition Order by the Senior District Judge
Brazil – v- G - Westminster Magistrates’ Court (August 2021) – Sundeep is instructed in this extradition case in which the Defendant is wanted to stand trial in Brazil in respect of various allegations of rape of his minor step daughter
Belgium – v- T - Westminster Magistrates’ Court (August 2021) – Sundeep is instructed in this case in which the Youth Requested Person is wanted to strand trial in Belgium in respect of various allegations of people trafficking. This case is linked to the tragic death of the thirty nine people found dead in the back of a trailer in Greys, Essex. The case attracted significant media interest.
Various – v- Ireland – Westminster Magistrates’ Court (2021) – Sundeep is instructed in four cases in which the Requested Persons are raising a challenge of the competence of the Irish Judicial Authority to issue European Arrest Warrants and Arrest Warrants under the TACA provisions in light of the United Kingdom’s exit from the European Union. These cases centres on a referral by the Irish Supreme Court to the CJEU on the competence of Ireland to issue these warrants.
Canada – v M – October 2019 – Sundeep is instructed in this case involving allegations against a UK national of hundreds of thousands of Canadian Dollars of investment fraud in a Ponzi scheme. case raise various issues to be argued at a hearing before the Senior District Judge
Albania – v- S - November 2019 – Sundeep is instructed in this case involving a conviction for a serios offence of robbery in Albania. The issues in this case involve Article 3 and 6 of the European Conviction of Human Rights
Tamas Kiss v Municipal Court of Miskoic Hungary [2019] EWHC 2873 (Admin) – Rashmi successfully represented this Requested Person on appeal in respect of two convictions warrants from Hungary
Miroslave Murin – v- District Court in Prague (Czech Republic) [2018] EWHC 1532(Admin) – Rashmi was instructed in this appeal which considered whether a conviction European Arrest Warrant is capable, in principle, of covering a request by a Judicial Authority of a requesting state for the return of a requested person to face proceedings to decide whether or not to activate a suspended sentence of imprisonment as a result of the commission of further offences. The High Court granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court was granted in this case.
Belgium – v- M – Westminster Magistrates’ Court (February 2019) – Sundeep successfully represented this Requested Person by establishing that the Belgian Judicial Authority had not made a decision to charge/try (Section 12A Extradition Act 2003)
Singapore – v- DJR – Westminster Magistrates’ Court (January 2018) – Sundeep is instructed to represent the Requested Person in an extradition request by the Government of Singapore relating to a notorious robbery of the Standard Chartered Bank in Singapore in July 2016. Although in its very early stages the case will raise a number of bars concerning the use of corporal punishment and fair trial rights in Singapore. (see http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/stan-chart-robbery-suspect-now-held-in-britain-to-contest-extradition-to-singapore)
Latvia -v- B (November 2017) - Rashmi successfully represented this Requested Person from a request to return to Latvia on an accusation warrant alleging the supply of drugs. The Requested Person was discharged under S21A (4) and Article 8.
Sesinova – v- District Court in Most, Czech Republic - [2017] EWHC 2755 (Admin) (November 2017) – Appeal dealing with the implications of the Supreme Court Judgement in Goluchowski – v- Poland [2016] 1 WLR 2665 and section 2 Extradition Act points.
Marcello Serra & Elisabel Galino – v- the Republic of Paraguay [2017] EWHC 2300 (Admin) – Sundeep dealt with this appeal to the High Court against an Order from (the now Senior) District Judge to the (now) Lord Chief Justice dealing for the first time with issues relating to extradition to Paraguay in the context of a high profile (in Paraguay) $45 million fraud against Cajubi pension fund.
Blaj and Others v Romania- [2015] EWHC 1710 (Admin) – Sundeep acted in this guideline judgement by the High Court on Article 3 Rights and conditions on Romanian prison conditions.
Mateusz Zakrzewski – Regional Court in Warsaw [2015] EWHC 3393 (Admin) – Sundeep dealt with this case in which the High Court for the first time provided guidance on the correct approach to be taken where an appellate Court has been asked to consider two cases of different European Arrest Warrants which were considered separately by different District Judges on different occasions.
Paraguay – v- S – (August 2015) Sundeep has been instructed in the first Paraguayan extradition request involving an allegation of fraud with an estimated loss of USD$36 million.
Nigeria – v – I (September 2015)- Sundeep has been instructed in the first Nigerian extradition request involving an allegation of fraud with an estimated loss of 762,000,000 Naira.
Wilus v Regional Court In Poznan Poland [2014] EWHC 2718 (Admin): – On the facts of the instant case the court was able to proceed even though the Appellant did not have the benefit of an interpreter. The Court confirmed this power for the first time.
Poland – v- IS – Morag successfully argued for the discharge of a requested person whose return was sought by the Polish Judicial Authorities on Article 8 European Convention of Human Rights grounds.
Peru – v- C – Sundeep is instructed in the first extradition case involving a request from the Peruvian Judicial Authority. The matter is listed for hearing with four other cases before the Deputy Senior District Judge over the course of five days in January 2015.
Spain – v- B - Sundeep is instructed in this case involving the extradition of a British national to Spain to face trial over multi million Euro tax fraud linked to the collapse of Alta Gas Ltd in 2000. Various bars have been raised in resistance to the request and judgment is awaited at the end of August 2014.
R v M - The requested person's return was sought by the Polish Government in relation to an allegation of murder in which he was identified as a suspect.
R v W - The requested person's return was sought by the Turkish authorities in relation to allegations of sexual abuse of a young girl. During the course of a the proceedings a procedural irregularity arose which Sundeep argued required the Court to discharge the Arrest Warrant and start proceedings afresh.
Regional Court in Gdansk v P – Sundeep is acting for one of the first defendants to raise a “Forum Bar” in Extradition proceedings following a change in the law last year.
