10 December 2009
Kozluk v Circuit Court in Lublin, Poland [2009] All ER (D) 02 (Dec)
For the purposes of s 8 of the Extradition Act 2003, an application for an adjournment and the decision to adjourn did not of themselves indicate that any steps had been taken in an extradition hearing; something more was required. A statement in court by the judge that the hearing had begun, been opened or was opening would suffice, even if immediately followed by a successful application to adjourn.
The fact that a judge might have intended to begin or open a hearing counted for nothing unless that intention was communicated to the parties.
