Hilali v The National Court, Madrid & Anor

Hilali v The National Court, Madrid & Anor

The appellant's identity was sufficiently proved, he was properly accused under the EAW, the conduct alleged constituted an extradition offence under s.64(3), specialty arrangements exist and are effective, there were no extraneous considerations or human rights violations, and there was no abuse of process; therefore, the appeal against extradition is dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Farid Hilali; First Respondent: Central Court of Criminal Proceedings No 5 of the National Court, Madrid; Second Respondent: Senior District Judge, Bow Street Magistrates’ Court
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
European Arrest Warrant, Specialty Principle, Extraneous Considerations, Proof of Identity, Accusation Threshold, Extradition Offence, Human Rights, Abuse of Process
Criminal Law Extradition Law Human Rights Law European Arrest Warrant Specialty Principle Extraneous Considerations Proof of Identity Accusation Threshold +3 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 8 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Farid Hilali

Appellant

Central Court of Criminal Proceedings No 5 of the National Court, Madrid

First Respondent

Senior District Judge, Bow Street Magistrates’ Court

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's identity was sufficiently proved under s.7 of the Extradition Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was 'accused' of an offence under s.64
  3. 3 Whether the conduct alleged constitutes an extradition offence under s.64(3)

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's identity was sufficiently proved, he was properly accused under the EAW, the conduct alleged constituted an extradition offence under s.64(3), specialty arrangements exist and are effective, there were no extraneous considerations or human rights violations, and there was no abuse of process; therefore, the appeal against extradition is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Extradition order against Farid Hilali upheld
  • No bar to extradition under s.13 or s.21 of the Extradition Act 2003