Danfelds & Anor v General Prosecutor's Office, Latvia [2020] EWHC 2042 (Admin) (28 July 2020)

Danfelds & Anor v General Prosecutor's Office, Latvia [2020] EWHC 2042 (Admin) (28 July 2020)

Permission to appeal is granted on the grounds that the district judge failed to properly analyse the evidence regarding Latvian prison conditions and did not follow the Aranyosi guidance, and made errors in the Article 8 proportionality assessment for both applicants.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] EWHC 2042 (Admin)
Parties
First Applicant: Martin Danfelds; Second Applicant: Endijs Jodelis; Respondent: General Prosecutor's Office, Latvia
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Extradition Appeal / Permission to Appeal Renewed Before Divisional Court
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted to both applicants on Article 3 and Article 8 ECHR grounds.
Legal Topics
Article 3 ECHR, Article 8 ECHR, Prison Conditions, Proportionality, European Arrest Warrant
Extradition Human Rights Article 3 ECHR Article 8 ECHR Prison Conditions Proportionality European Arrest Warrant

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martin Danfelds

First Applicant

Endijs Jodelis

Second Applicant

General Prosecutor's Office, Latvia

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Extradition Appeal / Permission to Appeal Renewed Before Divisional Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extradition to Latvia would expose applicants to a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment contrary to Article 3 ECHR
  2. 2 Whether extradition would be a disproportionate interference with applicants' right to private and family life under Article 8 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal is granted on the grounds that the district judge failed to properly analyse the evidence regarding Latvian prison conditions and did not follow the Aranyosi guidance, and made errors in the Article 8 proportionality assessment for both applicants.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted to both applicants on Article 3 and Article 8 ECHR grounds.

Orders

  • Latvia to provide assurances and information regarding prison conditions and Covid-19 measures as set out in the Annex.
  • Fresh evidence to be considered at the appeal hearing.