header-logo header-logo

19 February 2021
Issue: 7921 / Categories: Legal News , Brexit , Extradition , Criminal
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Extradition post-Brexit

39779
While much remains unchanged with regards to extradition mechanisms under the European arrest warrant scheme and the new arrangements post-Brexit, there are nonetheless some key differences to be aware of, write Nick Vamos & Katie Jones at Peters & Peters Solicitors LLP in this week’s NLJ.

The UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement has removed references to the principles of mutual trust and recognition, as well as introducing an ‘opt-in’ provision for dual criminality and an ‘opt out’ nationality bar to extradition to the UK.

Another potentially significant consequence of Brexit is the UK’s loss of access to the Second Schengen Information System. 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll