Kantorowicz v CPS on Behalf of the Judicial Authority in Poland

Extradition will ordinarily be proportionate despite interference with family life where, on broadly similar facts, domestic courts would impose an immediate custodial sentence. The interests of dependent children must receive proportionate weight, but Article 8 will defeat extradition only in very rare cases. That approach reflects the requirements of international comity and the need to enforce the European Framework Directive.

The appellant appealed against District Judge Devas's order of 18 January 2015 directing his extradition to Poland under two conviction European Arrest Warrants. One warrant concerned a suspended sentence for obtaining property by deception which had been activated; the other concerned an 18-month sentence for theft. The appellant relied on the Article 8 rights of himself, his partner and his children, and referred on appeal to his mother's health, his own health and depression. The District Judge had rejected the Article 8 challenge, and no fresh evidence was produced. The central issue was whether extradition would be disproportionate in light of the appellant's family and personal circumstances.

1. Appeal dismissed. The appellant's Article 8 rights were outweighed by the need to enforce the European Framework Directive.

2. The governing approach was explained in HH v Deputy Prosecutor of the Italian Republic, Genoa [2013] 1 AC 338 at [132]. Resistance to extradition based on dependent children's Article 8 rights should succeed only in very rare cases where, allowing proportionate weight to their interests, domestic sentencing courts would nevertheless have imposed an immediate custodial sentence on broadly similar facts. A wider approach would be inconsistent with international comity.

3. The court was satisfied that English courts would have imposed a substantial custodial sentence for the appellant's offences, even after taking account of his family's interests. The case therefore did not fall within the very rare category in which extradition could properly be avoided.

4. The appellant's partner could remain in the United Kingdom, while his mother could receive assistance from local Social Services. His unsuccessful attempt to have the warrant withdrawn in Poland did not alter the proportionality assessment.

• High Court (Administrative Court): appeal against the order of District Judge Devas dated 18 January 2015 dismissed.
• District Judge: ordered extradition under two conviction European Arrest Warrants and rejected the appellant's Article 8 challenge.