Dewhurst v Crown Prosecution Service

When deciding whether to vary bail in extradition proceedings, the court must assess the risk that the defendant will fail to return. The assessment is fact-sensitive and should consider the defendant’s personal and community ties, family circumstances, financial incentives, criminal history, previous compliance, the seriousness and likely duration of any foreign sentence, and the safeguards available. A relatively low risk of non-return may justify relaxing a passport-surrender condition where adequate security and a prompt re-surrender requirement are imposed.

The claimant was on bail in extradition proceedings concerning a possible sentence in Spain. A district judge at the City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court had refused to vary the bail conditions so that the claimant could recover his passport for a holiday in Goa. The claimant subsequently offered a cash deposit of £2,000, said to represent his family’s savings. The central issue was whether the conditions should be varied in light of the risk that he would not return to the United Kingdom.

1. Application granted. The terms of bail were varied to permit the claimant’s passport to be returned on payment of a £2,000 cash deposit.
2. The decisive question was the level of risk that the claimant would not return to the United Kingdom. The court acknowledged the seriousness of his criminal record and the possibility that a sentence in Spain would be particularly burdensome because it would be served abroad, away from his family and friends.
3. Overall, the risk was relatively low. Relevant considerations included the claimant’s fifteen years’ residence in the same council house, his strong local ties, the improbability that he would abandon his wife and children and forfeit the family’s savings, the maximum sentence he faced in Spain, and his previous compliance with bail despite having retained his passport after release in Spain.
4. The court did not disregard the possibility of non-return, but concluded that the risk was insufficient to justify preventing a holiday booked and paid for before the passport-surrender condition was imposed.
5. The claimant was required to surrender his passport within 24 hours of returning to the United Kingdom, or by 15 March, whichever was earlier. The usual practice concerning payment of the cash deposit was to apply. Reporting and residence conditions were treated as suspended while he was in Goa, so he was not required to return to the United Kingdom to sign on during the holiday.

The judgment records that a district judge at the City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court had refused to vary the claimant’s extradition bail conditions. The High Court subsequently varied those conditions on payment of a £2,000 cash deposit.