Zadworny v Regional Court in Torun Poland

An extradition appeal under section 26 of the Extradition Act 2003 may be disposed of by an order reflecting terms agreed between the parties. The court may also direct a different commencement date for the statutory extradition period under section 36(3)(b).

The appellant appealed under section 26 of the Extradition Act 2003 against a decision of District Judge Zani dated 6 January 2014 ordering his extradition to Poland. Before the appeal was determined on its merits, the parties came to terms. The court was therefore asked to make consequential orders, including an order concerning the commencement of the statutory period under section 36.

1. The appeal was brought under section 26 of the Extradition Act 2003 against the district judge’s extradition order.
2. The detail of the underlying extradition decision no longer mattered because the parties had come to terms. The court accordingly dismissed the appeal.
3. There was no order for costs, save for detailed assessment of the appellant’s publicly funded costs.
4. Under section 36(3)(b), the court directed that the 10-day period identified within section 36 should begin on 4 October 2014 rather than on the date of judgment.

• District Judge: District Judge Zani made an order for the appellant’s extradition to Poland on 6 January 2014.
• High Court (Administrative Court): The appeal under section 26 of the Extradition Act 2003 was dismissed after the parties came to terms. The court made consequential costs and timing directions.