Monasterski v Sad Okregowy W Katowicach Poland
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | MR JUSTICE MITTING |
| Judgment Date | 02 May 2012 |
| Neutral Citation | [2012] EWHC 1311 (Admin) |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
| Date | 02 May 2012 |
| Docket Number | CO/682/2012 |
[2012] EWHC 1311 (Admin)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London WC2A 2LL
Mr Justice Mitting
CO/682/2012
The Appellant did not attend and was not represented
Mr A Harbinson (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) appeared on behalf of the Respondent
By a conviction European Arrest Warrant, issued on 10 March 2008 by the Circuit Court in Katowice, the extradition of the appellant is sought to serve a sentence of 1 year and 3 months' imprisonment imposed by the District Court at Bytom on 17 July 2000 for two offences of thefts from cars committed on 19 and 20 February 1999.
The appellant raised a number of contentions before the district judge. He contended that he had served 8 months of the sentence by dint of being under house arrest (I assume while awaiting trial) and had applied for the remaining 5 months to be suspended. He applied to the district judge for an adjournment to permit a substantive hearing of his application to take place in the District Court in Katowice.
In this appeal, he has said that he awaits the judgment of the Divisional Court in Bytom on a similar application. I am told that he has also made an application for a presidential pardon. Mr Harbinson, who appears for the requesting state, tells me, and I accept, that as of yesterday SOCA had confirmed that the warrant was still effective and outstanding.
The grounds on which the appellant sought to resist extradition before the district judge were familiar Polish grounds: that Polish prisons were overcrowded and that his right to respect for his and his family's life under Article 8 would be infringed if he were to be extradited. He had a partner and child. The district judge dealt with all of these submissions shortly but unimpeachably. He concluded that the state of affairs in Polish prisons had been reviewed on numerous occasions by the courts and, absent specific evidence, would not give rise to a successful challenge under Article 3, and that the appellant's family life in the United Kingdom...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Artur Krolik, Sylwester Kazmierczak, Piotr Zwolinski, Tomasz Lachowski, Tomasz Soltan, Daniel Walachowski v Several Judicial Authorities of Poland
...[2012] EWHC 899 (Admin) Krzyzak v Poland [2012] Extradition LR 146 Stopyra v Poland [2012] Extradition LR 177 Monaterski v PolandUNK [2012] EWHC 1311 (Admin) Holman v Poland [2012] Extradition LR 295 Lacki v PolandUNK [2012] EWHC 1747 (Admin) Hartung v Poland [2012] Extradition LR 460 In ad......
-
Krolik and Others v Several Judicial Authorities of Poland
... [2012] EWHC 899(Admin) Krzyzak v Poland [2012] EWHC 810 (Admin) R(Stopyra) v Poland [2012] EWHC 903 (Admin) Monaterski v Poland [2012] EWHC 1311 (Admin) Holman v Poland [2012] EWHC 1503 (Admin) Lacki v Poland [2012] EWHC 1747 (Admin) Hartung v Poland [2012] EWHC 1884 (Admin) In addit......