[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 >> Krzyzoszczak, R (on the application of) v Polish Judicial Authority [2015] EWHC 701 (Admin) (26 January 2015) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2015/701.html Cite as: [2015] EWHC 701 (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
		26 January 2015

1. MR JUSTICE KING: This is an appeal by Mr Krzyzoszczak from the making of an extradition order on 4 November 2014 by District Judge Zani in the Westminster Magistrates' Court. The extradition was requested by the judicial authority in Poland pursuant to four European arrest warrants. Those warrants are, in part, conviction warrants seeking the extradition of the appellant for serving sentences which are outstanding and, in part, in relation to the arrest warrant no. 1 for the prosecution of one offence.
2. The grounds of appeal which have been lodged seek to pursue only one ground of appeal, that is to say that the extradition would be incompatible with the appellant's rights and those of his family under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
3. The appellant appears before me today in person by video link from where he is currently held in custody. His previous legal representatives have come off the record by order granted on 16 January 2015.
4. The appellant has not sought before me to pursue any ground of appeal in relation to Article 8. He has however raised an issue in relation to the European arrest warrant no. 4. This European arrest warrant which was before the district judge was that issued on 11 March 2014. This was a re-issue of an earlier European arrest warrant which had been withdrawn.
5. The arrest warrant no. 4 before the court below and before me relates to two offences. The first was possession of ecstasy committed "up to 2 March 2003"; the second was for theft and forgery of cheques committed "7 to 9 March 2003". The warrant in its now form says in box C under paragraph 3, remaining sentence to be served -

"Two years six months whereby the period of detention on remand from 18 March 2003 to 6 October 2003 was credited into serving this penalty of deprivation of freedom."

The warrant accordingly seeks the surrender of the appellant in relation to these matters to serve the remaining one year eleven months seven days. This has been confirmed by Further Information from the respondent.

6. The appellant was required to present himself to prison to serve this sentence on 31 March 2004 but failed to do so. He had been present during the course of the court proceedings.
7. The appellant seeks to say that he was in fact in custody on remand between March 2002 and June 2003. He says that he accordingly could not have committed the offences alleged against him as having occurred in March 2003. He seeks to rely on the earlier version of arrest warrant no. 4 which he tells me stated he had been in custody from March 2002.
8. I am however quite satisfied that this court can act only on the European arrest warrant as has been re-issued. There is no evidence before this court that the matters stated therein are inaccurate. It appears that the warrant was re-issued into its present form after the judicial authority had been asked to provide further information in light of the date of the alleged offences. Nothing which has been said by the appellant to me today can provide any ground for my allowing this appeal. It will of course be open to the appellant when he is extradited to raise the issue with the Polish authorities as to the precise time he has been on remand in custody. This court has no reason to think that the Polish judicial authorities will not deal with this matter in a proper and judicial fashion.
9. For all these reasons this appeal must be dismissed.