[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions >> Szarlinski v Regional Court In Elblag, Poland [2012] EWHC 2454 (Admin) (17 July 2012) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2012/2454.html Cite as: [2012] EWHC 2454 (Admin)

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

		Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL
		17th July 2012

1. MR JUSTICE BEAN: This is an appeal by Mr Szarlinski against the decision of District Judge Arbuthnot on 16th March this year, ordering his extradition to Poland to serve sentences of eight months' imprisonment for an assault and ten months' imprisonment, apparently consecutively, for two offences relating to drugs. Mr Szarlinski at the hearing before the District Judge said that the sentences were inaccurately stated. According to the note of that hearing, he had thought it was six months for the assault and nine months for the drugs. The District Judge found that since no evidence was produced in support of that, it was not a substantive argument she had to consider. She found that no bars were raised to extradition under the relevant act of Parliament, that the warrant was valid, and that no human rights issues were raised, and she ordered extradition.
2. On appeal, Mr Szarlinski, though unrepresented, has appeared in person, and I have read his notice of appeal. He says that he believes that the sentences both for drugs and for assault were suspended. But as to that, firstly, that argument was not put before the District Judge, and, secondly, I find, as she found, that I cannot go behind the warrant.
3. Mr Szarlinski appellant also mentions in his notice of appeal threats apparently made against him in Poland. I doubt very much whether these could be any bar to extradition, even if they had been raised before the District Judge. It is after all proposed that he be extradited to serve a sentence of custody in Poland, and what he does after he has served his sentence is a matter for him. But in any event, that kind of argument on the facts cannot be raised for the first time on appeal to this court.
4. Mr Szarlinski argues that all his family live in England, so that if he were sent back to Poland no-one would visit him. Sadly, this is a very common feature of extradition cases, but the courts have made it clear on many occasions that that cannot be an argument which defeats extradition.
5. Mr Szarlinski has told me today that he would not oppose extradition in this court if he were released on bail so that his family could see him. I am afraid it would be wrong for me to grant bail, though I hope that it will be possible for Mr Szarlinski's family to visit him before he is extradited; I am confident that it will be. In any event, that also is not a ground for refusing extradition.
6. It follows that there is no reason to interfere with the decision of the District Judge and this appeal must be dismissed.