header-logo header-logo

01 March 2012
Issue: 7503 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Extradition

R (on the application of Aldhouse) v Royal Government of Thailand and another [2012] EWHC 191 (Admin), [2012] All ER (D) 139 (Feb)

On its true construction, the requirement under s 103(9) of the Extradition Act 2003 that notice of appeal be given within a particular time and unalterable time limit meant that it had to be lodged with the court and served on the respondent or respondents to the appeal. That was the obvious meaning of the requirement to give notice of an appeal without further specification. It would have required clear words to make service of notice of appeal on a person who was not a respondent, nor even a party to the appeal, a prerequisite of the court’s jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.
 

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

NLJ Career Profile: Hugo Plowman, Mishcon de Reya

NLJ Career Profile: Hugo Plowman, Mishcon de Reya

From global fraud cases to fishing off-grid, Mishcon de Reya’s chair of dispute resolution Hugo Plowman discusses mentors, management switching off

Maguire Family Law—Jennifer Hudec, Ciara Florey, Alice Ferguson & Ruth Wynn

Maguire Family Law—Jennifer Hudec, Ciara Florey, Alice Ferguson & Ruth Wynn

Maguire Family Law announces partner promotion and new hires amid a record year for enquiries

Switalskis—Rebecca Parry & Hannah Gamble

Switalskis—Rebecca Parry & Hannah Gamble

Switalskis wills and probate team extends reach with two appointments

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll