Szalai v The Tribunal of Veszpre, Hungary

Szalai v The Tribunal of Veszpre, Hungary

The evidence of short-term breaches of assurances given by Hungary to the UK does not demonstrate a systemic problem or undermine the reliability of current assurances. There are no substantial grounds to believe the appellants will be exposed to a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment if extradited. Evidence relating to breaches of assurances given to other states is not directly relevant and should not be admitted. The Article 8 claim fails as the district judge's balancing exercise was correct and extradition is proportionate.

Parties
1st Appellant: Silvester Ferenc Szalai; 1st Respondent: The Tribunal of Veszpre, Hungary; 2nd Appellant: Oleksandr Zabolotnyi aka Zoltan Dani; 2nd Respondent: The Mateszalka District Court, Hungary
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Extradition Appeal / Judgment on Appeal and Application to Admit Fresh Evidence
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; application to admit fresh evidence refused.
Legal Topics
European Arrest Warrant, Article 3 ECHR, Article 8 ECHR, Prison Conditions, Reliability of Diplomatic Assurances
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Extradition Law European Arrest Warrant Article 3 ECHR Article 8 ECHR Prison Conditions Reliability of Diplomatic Assurances

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Silvester Ferenc Szalai

1st Appellant

The Tribunal of Veszpre, Hungary

1st Respondent

Oleksandr Zabolotnyi aka Zoltan Dani

2nd Appellant

The Mateszalka District Court, Hungary

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Extradition Appeal / Judgment on Appeal and Application to Admit Fresh Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether assurances given by Hungarian authorities regarding prison conditions are reliable
  2. 2 Whether fresh evidence of alleged breaches of assurances should be admitted
  3. 3 Whether extradition would breach Article 3 or Article 8 ECHR rights

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence of short-term breaches of assurances given by Hungary to the UK does not demonstrate a systemic problem or undermine the reliability of current assurances. There are no substantial grounds to believe the appellants will be exposed to a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment if extradited. Evidence relating to breaches of assurances given to other states is not directly relevant and should not be admitted. The Article 8 claim fails as the district judge's balancing exercise was correct and extradition is proportionate.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; application to admit fresh evidence refused.

Orders

  • Extradition must proceed in both cases.
  • Application to admit fresh evidence refused.