R v Daniel Adjei

For extraterritorial sexual-offence jurisdiction under section 72(3) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, the foreign-law condition concerns whether the conduct was criminal in the foreign country when committed. The provision also requires that the conduct would then have been a specified sexual offence in England and Wales, and that the accused satisfies the nationality or residence condition when proceedings are brought.

A later foreign limitation period, even where it prevents prosecution in that country or extinguishes the offence there, does not remove the jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales where those statutory conditions are met.

The appellant, an Italian national resident in the United Kingdom, pleaded guilty in the Crown Court at Cambridge to four offences under section 25 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. The offences had been committed in Italy between 2007 and 2010.

He appealed against conviction, contending that Italian limitation law deprived the English courts of jurisdiction. Fresh expert evidence, admitted on appeal, established that the conduct was criminal under Italian law when committed but that a prosecution in Italy was later time-barred. The central issue was whether section 72(3) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 required that a prosecution remained available in the foreign country when English proceedings began.

1. Appeal dismissed. The court held that the appellant’s convictions were safe. It admitted the agreed expert report on Italian law as fresh evidence under section 23 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968.
2. Section 72 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 distinguishes between offenders who were United Kingdom nationals, United Kingdom residents, or neither when they committed an act abroad. In each instance, the statutory scheme is concerned with the criminality of the conduct at the time of the act.
3. Under section 72(3), the necessary conditions are that the act was an offence under the foreign law when committed, that it would then have constituted a listed sexual offence in England and Wales, and that the accused met the nationality or residence condition when proceedings were brought. The condition in section 72(3)(b) does not require a foreign prosecution still to be available at that later date.
4. The Italian limitation period therefore did not deprive the English courts of jurisdiction. Although its expiry prevented a prosecution in Italy, it did not alter the fact that the conduct was criminal under Italian law when committed. The statutory conditions for jurisdiction were satisfied.
5. Having reached that conclusion, the court did not need to determine the scope of the discretion under section 72(7). Amendments made by the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 did not affect the issue or the result.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): appeal against conviction dismissed: [2023] EWCA Crim 1428.
• Crown Court at Cambridge: the appellant pleaded guilty to four sexual offences and was sentenced to imprisonment. No citation is stated.