Biernikiewicz v District Court of Koszalin, Poland

In extradition proceedings, the English court must not substitute its own sentencing policy for that of the requesting state. The relative minor nature of the offence is relevant to proportionality and to the Article 8 balance, but will rarely outweigh the public interest in honouring treaties and giving effect to extradition requests.

The appellant had been convicted in Poland of five offences involving false statements about employment and was subject to an 18-month term of imprisonment. A District Judge ordered her extradition under a European arrest warrant. She appealed, arguing that extradition was disproportionate because the financial dispute might be settled, the offending was relatively minor, and an equivalent sentence would not ordinarily be imposed in England. The central issue was whether those matters justified overturning the extradition order.

1. The appeal was dismissed. The court followed the Divisional Court’s decision in JP, which established that an English court must not impose its own sentencing policy on the courts of the requesting state.
2. The relatively minor nature of the offence was a factor to be weighed in the proportionality and Article 8 balance. It rarely prevailed against the public interest in honouring treaties and giving effect to extradition requests.
3. Those principles provided no legal ground for overturning the District Judge’s decision. The appellant therefore remained liable to be extradited if the matter was not resolved in Poland.
4. Because the appellant stated that a decision on a proposed settlement was expected within a month, the order dismissing the appeal was not to be sealed until 14 days after judgment. The practical effect was to postpone extradition so that it could not occur before four weeks after judgment. A usual representation order was made.

• District Judge: District Judge Grant ordered the appellant’s extradition to Poland.
• High Court (Administrative Court): The appeal was dismissed. The order was not to be sealed for 14 days to allow the proposed settlement to be considered.