Kaminski and Others v Judicial Authority of Poland and Others
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Ouseley J |
| Judgment Date | 18 October 2010 |
| Neutral Citation | [2010] EWHC 2772 (Admin) |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
| Docket Number | CO/9132/2010, CO/8972/2010,CO/9132/2010, CO/8972/2010, CO/8385/2010, CO/10083/2010 |
| Date | 18 October 2010 |
[2010] EWHC 2772 (Admin)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Before: Mr Justice Ouseley
CO/9132/2010, CO/8972/2010
CO/8385/2010, CO/10083/2010
Ms Rosemary Davidson (instructed by Lawrence & Co) appeared on behalf of the First Claimant/Respondent, and for Lawrence & Co on costs
Mr Ben Keith (instructed by Lawrence & Co) appeared on behalf of the Third Claimant/Respondent, and for Lawrence & Co on costs in Ciarach and Ziolkowski
The Fourth Claimant/Respondent appeared in person on the strike out application
The Second Claimant/Respondent did not appear and was not represented
Mr Brian Gibbins (instructed by the CPS) appeared on behalf of the First, Second and Third Defendants/Applicants
Mr Daniel Sternberg (instructed by the CPS) appeared on behalf of the Fourth Defendants/Applicants
(As Approved)
: There is before the court an application by the CPS, acting on behalf of a number of judicial authorities in Poland, to strike out appeals brought by a number of people whose extradition is sought to Poland. In three cases, the notice of appeal has no grounds at all specified in the section in the form where grounds are to be stated, which is section 6 of the N161 appellant's notice form. A separate sheet is to be provided containing those grounds.
In one case, the notice had a sheet attached to it, which raised a ground concerning the refusal of the District Judge at the extradition hearing to grant an adjournment. Mr Gibbins, for the CPS, rightly points out that that is not a ground of appeal which could lead to an appeal being allowed. If an adjournment was unlawfully refused, the remedy is by way of an application for permission to seek judicial review. So, he submits, in each of these cases there were no grounds of appeal. This, he says, and he is right, is a common enough problem when solicitors are acting or, even more so, when an appellant is acting in person. He also submits, and I have no doubt that he is right about this as well, that sometimes, and again particularly where there is an appellant in person, the putting in of a notice of appeal without grounds is a mere device to delay extradition or to gain some bargaining power for negotiations between the appellant and requesting judicial authority.
I have also had the benefit for a related purpose of a description of the problems that are faced by duty extradition solicitors in dealing with notices of appeal for represented but anxious appellants within the relatively short time-frame which the Extradition Act 2003 provides in section 26(4). Section 26(4) states:
“Notice of an appeal under this section must be given in accordance with rules of court before the end of the permitted period, which is 7 days starting with the day on which the order is made.”
Mr Gibbins rightly emphasises that the operation of Part 1 extradition is intended to be a speedy process.
The provisions of section 26(4) have been considered in the case of Mucelli v the Government of Albania [2009] UKHL 2. The House of Lords, without enthusiasm, concluded that if a notice of appeal was not given within the seven days, the notice of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lukaszewski and Others v The District Court in Torun, Poland and Others (No 3)
...in CPR rule 3.10 could be invoked to cure the defect without offending the strict requirements of the 2003 Act." 18 In Kaminski & Ors v Judicial Authority Of Poland & Ors [2010] EWHC 2772 (Admin), Ouseley J refused to strike out four appeals on the grounds that no or insufficient grounds w......
-
Lukaszewski and Others v The District Court in Torun, Poland and Others (No 2)
... [2009] EWHC 18921 (Admin) and R (Kane) v Trial Court No 5 Marbella, Spain [2011] EWHC 824 (Admin); [2012] 1 WLR 375. In Kaminski v Judicial Authority of Poland [2010] EWHC 2772 (Admin) the court refused to strike out appeals where no or only plainly inadequate grounds were stated in the......
-
Marek Polkowski v District Court in Kalisz, Poland (A Polish Judicial Authority)
...19 The difficulty with that argument is that in Pomiechowski itself the court referred to the decision of Ouseley J in Kaminski v Judicial Authority of Poland [2010] EWHC 2772 (Admin), in which Ouseley J had refused to strike out notices of appeal because there were no or insufficient groun......
-
Marek Polkowski v District Court in Kalisz, Poland (A Polish Judicial Authority)
...argument is that in Pomiechowski itself the court referred to the decision of Ouseley J in Kaminski v Judicial Authority of Poland[2011] Extradition LR 375, in which Ouseley J had refused to strike out notices of appeal because there were no or insufficient grounds. With such conflicting au......