AB v A Lithuanian Judicial Authority (Rev 1)

AB v A Lithuanian Judicial Authority (Rev 1)

The District Judge conducted the required balancing exercise, properly considering the factors for and against extradition, including the welfare of the applicant's children and the applicant's mental health. The new evidence regarding the grandmother's health and willingness to care for the children, and the applicant's pregnancy, did not materially alter the balance. The public interest in extradition outweighed the interference with private and family life, and the decision was not wrong.

Parties
Applicant: AB; Respondent: A Lithuanian Judicial Authority
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Extradition Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Article 8 ECHR, Right to Private and Family Life, Proportionality, Extradition Act 2003, Best Interests of the Child
Extradition Law Human Rights Law Article 8 ECHR Right to Private and Family Life Proportionality Extradition Act 2003 Best Interests of the Child

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AB

Applicant

A Lithuanian Judicial Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Extradition Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extradition would be a disproportionate interference with the applicant and her children's right to private and family life under Article 8 ECHR and s.21A of the Extradition Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether new evidence regarding the applicant's mother's ability to care for the children and the applicant's pregnancy should alter the extradition decision

Ratio Decidendi

The District Judge conducted the required balancing exercise, properly considering the factors for and against extradition, including the welfare of the applicant's children and the applicant's mental health. The new evidence regarding the grandmother's health and willingness to care for the children, and the applicant's pregnancy, did not materially alter the balance. The public interest in extradition outweighed the interference with private and family life, and the decision was not wrong.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to appeal granted
  • Appeal dismissed; extradition order stands