Lejnowski v District Court in Torun (Poland)

Personal and family hardship does not necessarily create a bar to extradition under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The court must assess the circumstances relied upon, including family relationships, children, health difficulties and the requested person’s contribution to the community. Where those circumstances do not establish an Article 8 bar, the extradition appeal must be dismissed and the requested person returned to serve the outstanding sentences.

The appellant appealed against an order made by District Judge Blake at Westminster Magistrates’ Court requiring his extradition to Poland under a conviction European Arrest Warrant. Poland sought his return to serve several custodial sentences for offences including burglary, theft, drug possession, assault and driving offences.

The appellant relied on his established family life in the United Kingdom, his partner’s health problems, his role as the family’s main breadwinner, his rehabilitation and his contribution to the community. No grounds barring extradition had been pursued before the District Judge. The central issue was whether extradition was barred, in particular by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

1. The appeal was dismissed. The appellant was to be returned to Poland to serve the outstanding sentences.
2. The court recognised that cases involving a requested person who had established a family life, turned his life around and made a valuable contribution were particularly difficult. The appellant had lived openly in the United Kingdom since 2008, had four children, and relied on his partner’s health problems, his role as main breadwinner and the effect of extradition on his children and family.
3. Those circumstances did not constitute a bar to extradition under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The judgment does not set out a separate structured proportionality test, but records the court’s conclusion that there was no Article 8 bar on the facts.
4. The case had been straightforward before the District Judge, and no matters barring extradition had been raised there. The Administrative Court nevertheless considered the Article 8 issue and concluded that there was no basis on which it could prevent extradition.

• Westminster Magistrates’ Court: District Judge Blake ordered the appellant’s extradition to Poland on 5 December 2016 under a conviction European Arrest Warrant.
• High Court (Administrative Court): The appeal was dismissed. The court held that Article 8 did not bar extradition and ordered that the appellant be returned to Poland to serve the outstanding sentences.