Cesar Enasoaie v Court of Bacau, Romania
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Lord Justice Holroyde,Mr Justice Swift |
| Judgment Date | 20 January 2021 |
| Neutral Citation | [2021] EWHC 69 (Admin) |
| Date | 20 January 2021 |
| Docket Number | Case No: CO/3333/2019 & CO/3404/2019 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
[2021] EWHC 69 (Admin)
Lord Justice Holroyde
Mr Justice Swift
Case No: CO/3333/2019 & CO/3404/2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Jonathan Hall QC & Benjamin Joyes (instructed by Shaw Graham Kersh, solicitors) for the Appellant
Helen Malcolm QC & David Ball (instructed by CPS Extradition Unit) for the Respondent
Hearing dates: 11th & 12th November 2020
Approved Judgment
Lord Justice Holroyde and
Cesar Enasoaie (“Mr Enasoaie”) has been convicted before the court of Bacau in Romania of twelve offences of embezzlement. On 11 October 2017 he was sentenced to 5 years' imprisonment, all of which remains to be served. In the absence of any appeal, that sentence was made final on 18 November 2017. On 29 November 2017 the Romanian court, as the competent judicial authority (for convenience, “the JA”), issued a European Arrest Warrant, reference number 16038/180/2016 (“the EAW”). The EAW was certified in this country by the National Crime Agency on 18 June 2019, and Mr Enasoaie was arrested two days later. On 23 August 2019 District Judge Zani (“the DJ”) ordered his extradition on nine of the offences but discharged him on the other three offences. Mr Enasoaie now appeals against the decision ordering his extradition. The JA cross-appeals against the decision discharging Mr Enasoaie on three offences.
We record at the outset our thanks for the very helpful written and oral submissions which we have received.
The EAW
Mr Enasoaie is now aged 46. The EAW relates to offences, committed on various dates between February 2003 and November 2012, of embezzlement (Article 215 of the Romanian Criminal Code 1), forgery of documents under private signature (Article 290 2) and stamp forgery (Article 283 para 1 3).
Mr Enasoaie was convicted and sentenced on a total of 7 occasions. His final sentence of 5 years' imprisonment was reached by the application of the procedure contained in the Romanian Criminal Code for aggregation of sentences for multiple offences. Under that procedure, the aggregated or final sentence (also referred to as “the resulting sentence”) was the single sentence to be served by Mr Enasoaie as punishment for all of his criminal conduct.
The EAW gives the following details of the twelve offences:
Criminal sentence 325/02.06.2006 was a sentence of 2 years' imprisonment for “committing the embezzlement offense in continued form”, consisting of –
Offence (i): Mr Enasoaie “collected from Se. Pepa Prod SRL Piatra Neamt, on 18.02.2003 and 05.03.2003 the amounts of 5.146.595 RON, respectively 4.095.682 RON as well as the amount of 2.991.541 RON from SC Delta Corn SRL Piatra Neamt, without depositing them in the unit's account”;
Offence (ii): “on 15.04.2003, 19.03.2003, 23.04.2003, 23.04.2003, 25.04.2003, 09.05.2003, 09.05.2003, 17.05.2003, 21.05.2003, 23.05.2003, 03.06.2003 and 13.06.2003, the indictee has collected from Bacau warehouse amounts of money coming from the collection of the invoices' amounts of different economic operators. The indictee has appropriated the respective amounts of money”.
Criminal sentence 998/19.05.2008 was a sentence of 18 months' imprisonment for offences of embezzlement and forgery:
(iii) “Between 1.06.2005 – 1.05.2006 as sales agent of SC Tiberias 200 SRL Bacau, by modifying the data on the second copy of the receipts printed for the highlighting of the amounts collected from clients, either by specifying an amount of money inferior to the collected one, or by writing the name of another company in relation to the collection he has appropriated the amount of 2635.88 RON” [approximately £500].
Criminal sentence 8/11.01.2010 was a sentence of 18 months' imprisonment for “the embezzlement offence in continued form”:
Offence (iv): “during November 2006–May 2008, being a Distribution Manager at SC Partner Groups SRL Onesti, by forging several invoices he has appropriated the amount of 13,271.88 RON [over £2,500] at the expense of the company that he represented, the prejudice not being recovered”.
Criminal sentence 1940/19.11.2012 was a sentence of 2 years' imprisonment for offences of embezzlement and forgery:
Offence (v): “during August 2008 – May 2009, being the employee of SC Bardi Auto SRL Chiajna, Ilfov county, as a commercial representative, based on a single criminal resolution by the forgery of documents he has appropriated money and goods from the administration with a total value of 33,134.78 RON” [over £6,300].
Criminal sentence 1545/12.10.2015 was a sentence of 2 years 6 months' imprisonment for stamp forgery offences:
Offence (vi): “as a bus ticket inspector, during November 2010 – January 2011, he has filled in 7 counterfeited commutation tickets and he has sold the defendants Antoche Laurentian Iulian and Mengheres Alexandru Gabriel, counterfeited commutation tickets, to be released into circulation”.
Criminal sentence 708/12.05.2016 was a sentence of 4 years 6 months' imprisonment for “committing the embezzlement offense … and the forged documents under private signature offense” consisting of –
Offence (vii): “during 06.2012–11.2012, as a Sales Manager at SC Edcamada Construct S.R.L. Vaslui, based on the same criminal resolution, he has appropriated amounts of money from the completed sales and different goods from the inventory, causing the aggrieved person Edcamada Construct S.R.L. Vaslui a prejudice with the amount of 26.930,47 RON [£5,100];
Offence (viii): “he has appropriated from the inventory goods with the total value of 11.119,88 RON [£2,100] afferent to the fiscal invoices series VSEDC no. 59864/01.11.2012 of 4.291,65 RON, nr. 59475/17.07.2012 of 752 RON, nr. 3672/13.11.2012 of 3.101,14 RON, nr. 3154/31.08.2012 of 435,02 RON, nr. 3096/27.08.2012 of 435,02 RON, nr. 59711115.08.2012 of 940,01 RON, nr. 59578/30.07.2012 of 1.165,04 RON, which he did not deliver to the beneficiary legal persons and which he has used without depositing their countervalue at the company”;
Offence (ix): “he has appropriated from the administration the amount of 8.522,33 RON [£1,600] afferent to the collection receipts no. 5100/03.11.2012 of 1.100 RON (client S. C. A1ova Corn S.R.L.), no. 5601/01.11.2012 of 3.000 RON (client Metal Invest Grup S.R.L.), no. 5602/02.11.2012 of 3.081,54 RON (client S.C. Metal Invest Grup S.R.L.), no. 5603/07.11.2012 of 764,79 RON (client Nechit Monastery) and no. 5604/16.11.2012 of 576 lei (client Terra Nice S.R.L.), which he has not deposited in the account of S.C. Edcamada Construct S.R.L. Vaslui”;
Offence (x): “he has appropriated from the administration the amount of 7.288,26 RON [£1,400] by forging the green copy of four payment receipts, respectively no. 5084/06.07.2012 of 2.476,03 RON, no. 5078/13.06.2012 of 3.112,84 RON, no. 5085/29.08.2012 of 2.114,39 RON and no. 5087/25.07.2012 of 2.635 RON, inserting on these copies smaller amounts and other clients than those on the blue copies delivered to the legal persons and which certified the reality, respectively no. 5084/30.08.2012 of 1.000 RON, no. 5078/20.08.2012 of 550 RON, nr. 5085/31.08.2012 of 1.000 RON and no. 5087/31.08.2012 of 500 RON”.
Criminal sentence 1519/11.10.17 was a sentence of 5 years' imprisonment for “committing the embezzlement and forgery and use of forgery” consisting of
Offence (xi): “during June-August 2011, as a sales agent of SC Sprinter 2000 SA Brasov, he has continuously appropriated, on different periods but for the same criminal resolution and at the expense of the same passive subject, by different criminal methods presented in the factual situation, the total amount of 4.985,35 RON [£950]”;
Offence (xii): “during June-August 2011, as a sales agent of SC Sprinter 2000 SA Brasov, he has forged, by counterfeiting, at different periods in time but for the same criminal resolution and at the expense of the same passive subject, the invoices allegedly issued to SC DUMI SRL (no. 7132437 of 22.06.2011), MEDICAL PRACTICE TUVEC CAMELIA (no.7132830 of 01.07.2011), SC ANAMATEX SRL (no.7133517 of 12.07.2011), SC COMTEL SRL (no.7134061 of 22.07.2011), SC MULTI SOFT SRL (no.7134067 of 25.07.201 1), SC GELMYDA SRL (no.7134078 of 28.07.2011 and no.7134080 of 28.07.201 1) and SC EUROLIL SRL (no.7134083 of 29.07.2011) respectively, the carbonless copies of the receipts no.7349300 of 21.06.2011, no.7351334 of 22.07.2011, no.7351336 of 26.07.2011 and no.7349895 of 01.07.2011, in the amount of 202,47 RON, supporting documents that he has delivered to this employer, and in this manner, he has facilitated the illegal appropriation of several amounts of money belonging to the aggrieved person”.
The issues at the extradition hearing
Romania has been designated as a Category 1 territory for the purposes of the Extradition Act 2003 (“the Act”) and Part 1 of the Act accordingly applies. Mr Enasoaie raised issues as to whether the offences set out in the EAW were all extradition offences and whether his extradition would violate his rights under articles 3 and 8 of the ECHR.
Section 10 of the Act required the DJ to decide whether each offence specified in the EAW was an extradition offence and, if it was not, to order the discharge of Mr Enasoaie on that offence.
Section 65 of the Act, so far as material for present purposes, gives the following definition of an extradition offence:
“(2) The conduct constitutes an extradition offence in relation to the category 1 territory if the conditions in subsection (3), ( 4) or (5)...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Suceava District Court, Romania v Marian Gurau
...with for the offences for which he has been extradited. That question has been answered in the affirmative in Enasoaie v Romania [2021] EWHC 69 (Admin) at [68] (a case not cited to the DJ) and again, recently, in Viorel Nonea v Judecatoria Oradea Romania [2022] EWHC 2217 (Admin). The DJ w......
-
Alexandru Sirbu v Sibiu Court of Law, Romania
...but had that been so the observations made on the relevant provisions in Romanian law at the end of the judgment in Enasoaie (see [2021] EWHC 69 (Admin), at §§64 – 71) would have applied. On that basis, I would have concluded that no bar to extradition in this case arose by reason of secti......
-
Viorel Nonea v Judecatoria Oradea Romania
...the Appellant now finds himself. 11 Dr Mares has given evidence of a similar nature in the past in Enasoaie v Court of Bacau Romania [2021] EWHC 69 (Admin). His evidence on that occasion referred to the Romanian High Court decision. His first report in this case mirrored that provided to t......