Enasoaie v Court of Bacau, Romania [2021] EWHC 69 (Admin) (20 January 2021)

Enasoaie v Court of Bacau, Romania [2021] EWHC 69 (Admin) (20 January 2021)

All the challenged Romanian embezzlement offences involved dishonesty as established by the facts and further information, satisfying the dual criminality requirement under UK law. The District Judge was wrong to discharge Mr Enasoaie on offences (i), (ii), and (xi); all six offences are extradition offences. As all offences are extradition offences, the issues of speciality and enforceability of the judgment do not arise. Even if they did, Romanian law provides mechanisms to comply with the speciality principle, and there is no compelling evidence to rebut the presumption that Romania will comply with its obligations.

Citation
[2021] EWHC 69 (Admin)
Parties
Appellant/cross Respondent: Cesar Enasoaie; Respondent/cross Appellant: Court of Bacau, Romania
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Extradition Appeal and Cross Appeal / High Court Appeal From District Judge's Extradition Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Dual Criminality, Speciality Principle, European Arrest Warrant, Embezzlement, Forgery, Extradition Act 2003, Framework Decision 2002/584/jha
Criminal Law Extradition Law European Law Dual Criminality Speciality Principle European Arrest Warrant Embezzlement Forgery +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cesar Enasoaie

Appellant/cross Respondent

Court of Bacau, Romania

Respondent/cross Appellant

Procedural Posture

Extradition Appeal and Cross Appeal / High Court Appeal From District Judge's Extradition Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Romanian offences are extradition offences under UK law (dual criminality)
  2. 2 Whether the principle of speciality would be breached if extradition is ordered for some but not all offences
  3. 3 Whether the European Arrest Warrant contains particulars of an enforceable judgment as required by law

Ratio Decidendi

All the challenged Romanian embezzlement offences involved dishonesty as established by the facts and further information, satisfying the dual criminality requirement under UK law. The District Judge was wrong to discharge Mr Enasoaie on offences (i), (ii), and (xi); all six offences are extradition offences. As all offences are extradition offences, the issues of speciality and enforceability of the judgment do not arise. Even if they did, Romanian law provides mechanisms to comply with the speciality principle, and there is no compelling evidence to rebut the presumption that Romania will comply with its obligations.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal allowed

Orders

  • Extradition of Mr Enasoaie ordered on all six embezzlement offences specified in the EAW
  • District Judge's discharge on offences (i), (ii), and (xi) set aside