Andrius Grazulis v Circuit Court in Klaipeda, Lithuania
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Supperstone |
| Judgment Date | 09 February 2015 |
| Neutral Citation | [2015] EWHC 707 (Admin) |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
| Docket Number | CO/5671/2014 |
| Date | 09 February 2015 |
[2015] EWHC 707 (Admin)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London WC2A 2LL
Mr Justice Supperstone
CO/5671/2014
Mr Mark Smith (instructed by HP Gower) appeared on behalf of the Appellant
Miss Catherine Brown (instructed by the CPS Extradition Unit) appeared on behalf of the Respondent
(As approved)
The appellant appeals against the decision of District Judge Coleman, made on 1 December 2014 at the Westminster Magistrates' Court, ordering the appellant's extradition to Lithuania on a conviction European Arrest Warrant issued by the Klaipeda Circuit Court in Lithuania on 9 July 2014 and certified by the NCA on 15 July 2014. The appellant's extradition is sought to serve a sentence of imprisonment of 1 year, 8 months and 16 days in respect of an offence of blackmail.
The appellant raises two grounds of appeal: first, that his extradition would be an abuse of process; and second, that it would be a disproportionate interference with his and his family's Article 8 rights. As to the first, Mr Smith, for the appellant, submits that it would be an abuse of process to extradite the appellant since, pursuant to the Lithuanian Statute of Limitations, as set out in box F of the EAW, the judgment would be unenforceable: given that the appellant was originally arrested on 4 February, the 3-year time limit will have expired. Mr Smith submits that the continuation of the extradition request beyond the end of the time limit is conduct which is clearly capable of amounting to an abuse, as it would be oppressive to remove the appellant from his family in the UK in order to be brought before the Lithuanian court only to be released due to the expiry of the statutory time limit.
Mr Smith submits that it appears from the face of the EAW that there is a 3-year time limit that started on 12 February 2012 and ended on 12 February 2015. We are now 9 February 2015. The court must satisfy itself that the appellant will not simply be extradited to Lithuania to be told judgment would not be executed. That would be an abuse of process. Applying the Tollman procedure, if there are reasonable grounds for believing the time limit may have run out, this court needs to embark on a procedure for establishing whether that is so or not.
First, a preliminary point as to whether this issue of abuse which was not raised before the lower court may be taken on this appeal. I am satisfied that this new point may be raised for the reasons...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pawal Krzyanowski v Regional Court of Krakow
...be maintained, if that Polish judgment and its enforceability had expired. Ms Burton's industry has uncovered the case of Grazulis [2015] EWHC 707 (Admin) at paragraph 3 to 5. Paragraph 3 of that judgment records the need, in a situation where such a concern arises, for the Court to “embar......