header-logo header-logo

Extradition

04 July 2014
Issue: 7613 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Neteczca v Governor of Holloway Prison [2014] EWHC 2098 (Admin), [2014] All ER (D) 214 (Jun)

The statutory scheme did not permit the right of a requested person to be discharged to be circumvented by agreeing a later starting date after the expiry of the period identified in s 36(3)(a) of the Extradition Act 2003, unless reasonable cause was shown. Section 36(3)(a) of the Act specified the 10 days during which a person had to be extradited by reference to a starting day. That was the day on which the decision of the relevant court or the appeal became final, or proceedings on the appeal were discontinued. Section 36(8) of the Act identified two conditions which had to be satisfied before the judge was required to order discharge. The first was that s 36(2) of the Act had not been complied with. Where the starting date was the date on which the proceedings on the appeal were discontinued, once ten days had expired, then s 36(2) of the Act had not been complied with and the first condition

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll