header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
17 February 2021 / Nick Vamos , Katie Jones
Issue: 7921 / Categories: Features , Brexit , EU , Extradition , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Post-Brexit security: An eleventh-hour reprieve?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
39779
Nick Vamos & Katie Jones take a look at what’s changed & what’s next for extradition in the UK post-Brexit
  • While many similarities remain between the European arrest warrant scheme and the new extradition regime, there are also notable differences.
  • These include potentially greater scope for challenges to extradition to certain countries, as well as the introduction of an overarching principle of proportionality and dual criminality being subject to an ‘opt in’ provision.
  • The first legal test of the new arrangements has already been heard in Polakowski v Westminster Magistrates’ Court, with several further key cases listed for the near future.

The UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA), agreed between the parties on Christmas Eve and implemented in UK domestic law on 31 December 2020 by the European Union (Future Relationship) Act 2020, provides a new framework for extradition post-Brexit. Title VII of Part 3 of the TCA, entitled ‘Surrender’, sets out the principles and procedure to be applied going forward.

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: 40 years on, has PACE lost its edge?
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
NLJ this week: Stress-testing the City
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
NLJ this week: How sure is ‘sure’ enough?
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
NLJ this week: A deferred prosecution reprieve
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
NLJ this week: Mandelson, Epstein & the court of popular opinion
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll