Danfelds & Anor v General Prosecutor's Office, Latvia

Danfelds & Anor v General Prosecutor's Office, Latvia

Permission to appeal is granted on the grounds that the district judge failed to properly analyse the CPT report and other key evidence regarding Latvian prison conditions, and failed to follow the Aranyosi guidance. Permission is also granted on Article 8 grounds due to errors in the proportionality assessment and...

Source-derived case information.

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 Applications)
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted to both applicants on Article 3 and Article 8 ECHR grounds.
Legal Topics
Article 3 ECHR (inhuman or Degrading Treatment), Article 8 ECHR (right to Private and Family Life), European Arrest Warrant, Prison Conditions, Proportionality in Extradition
Extradition Law Human Rights Law Article 3 ECHR (inhuman or Degrading Treatment) Article 8 ECHR (right to Private and Family Life) European Arrest Warrant Prison Conditions Proportionality in Extradition

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
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 Applications)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extradition to Latvia would expose the applicants to a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment contrary to Article 3 ECHR due to prison conditions
  2. 2 Whether extradition would constitute a disproportionate interference with the applicants’ right to private and family life under Article 8 ECHR
  3. 3 Whether the district judge failed to properly analyse the evidence and apply the Aranyosi test

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal is granted on the grounds that the district judge failed to properly analyse the CPT report and other key evidence regarding Latvian prison conditions, and failed to follow the Aranyosi guidance. Permission is also granted on Article 8 grounds due to errors in the proportionality assessment and changed circumstances.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • Further information and assurances to be requested from Latvia regarding prison conditions, specific prison allocation, staffing, prisoner numbers, monitoring, and Covid-19 measures as set out in the Annex.
  • Fresh evidence admitted de bene esse; admissibility to be determined at the appeal hearing.