header-logo header-logo

10 September 2009
Issue: 7384 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Extradition

R (on the application of Bary and another) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009] EWHC 2068 (Admin), [2009] All ER (D) 59 (Aug)

In assessing whether in ordering extradition there would be a real risk of violation of Art 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the following principles were relevant and ought to be borne in mind:

(i) the test was a stringent one and the burden of proof was on the extraditee; (ii) the extraditee should not be extradited unless the safeguards that s/he would enjoy in the requesting state were as effective as the convention standard;
(iii) it was a matter for the requesting authority where and in what circumstances they detained extraditees both pre-trial and post-conviction; (iv) the importance of international co-operation and maintaining treaty obligations was an important factor;
(v) it was essential to focus on what was likely to happen to an extraditee in his/her particular circumstances;
(vi) punishment that would be regarded as inhuman or degrading in the domestic field would not necessarily be so regarded where the

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: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll