Polish extradition request discharged under s.20

On 18 November 2024, DJ Zani discharged AG in a Polish extradition request. AG’s extradition was sought in relation to two convictions for fraud. 

According to the arrest warrant, AG had been “personally summoned” in 2018 and convicted in his absence, and therefore he did not have the right to a retrial. At the extradition hearing, the Prosecution conceded that they were unable to confirm whether AG was personally summoned in Poland or in the UK. Importantly, there is no such thing as a lawful summons by Polish authorities on UK territory because that would be in violation of the principle of territorial sovereignty and a direct circumvention of an accusation warrant in extradition proceedings – a point which was accepted by the DJ.

Louise made successful oral and written submissions that this was precisely the “ambiguity” or “confusion” required under Cretu v Romania [2016] EWHC 353 (Admin), which allows a judge to look behind the statement on the arrest warrant that AG was “personally summoned”. With the Prosecution unable to prove that AG was correctly summoned to his trial in Poland and no retrial being offered, AG was discharged under s.20 Extradition Act 2003. 

Louise Willocx was instructed by Seema Dosaj of Berris Law.