Jane v Prosecutor General's Office, Lithuania

Jane v Prosecutor General's Office, Lithuania

There remains a real risk that Mr Jane, if extradited to Lithuania and held in remand prison (specifically Lukiskes), would be subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment contrary to Article 3 ECHR, as Lithuania has not provided clear and cogent evidence that prison conditions have improved to comply with Article 3. Therefore, extradition cannot proceed unless and until Lithuania provides an adequate assurance that Mr Jane will not be exposed to such risk.

Parties
Appellant: Guy Jane; Respondent: Prosecutor General’s Office, Lithuania
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Extradition Appeal / Appeal From Order of Extradition by Deputy Senior District Judge
Outcome
Appeal stayed to allow Lithuania opportunity to provide assurance.
Legal Topics
Extradition, Article 3 ECHR, Prison Conditions, Mutual Trust, Assurances in Extradition, Burden of Proof
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Extradition Law Extradition Article 3 ECHR Prison Conditions Mutual Trust Assurances in Extradition +1 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 5 Authorities cited 28 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Guy Jane

Appellant

Prosecutor General’s Office, Lithuania

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Extradition Appeal / Appeal From Order of Extradition by Deputy Senior District Judge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extradition of Mr Jane to Lithuania would be unjust or oppressive under section 14 of the Extradition Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether there is a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment contrary to Article 3 ECHR due to threats of violence or prison conditions in Lithuania
  3. 3 Whether the Lithuanian authorities have provided sufficient evidence or assurances to dispel the risk of Article 3 violations

Ratio Decidendi

There remains a real risk that Mr Jane, if extradited to Lithuania and held in remand prison (specifically Lukiskes), would be subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment contrary to Article 3 ECHR, as Lithuania has not provided clear and cogent evidence that prison conditions have improved to comply with Article 3. Therefore, extradition cannot proceed unless and until Lithuania provides an adequate assurance that Mr Jane will not be exposed to such risk.

Court Disposition

Appeal stayed to allow Lithuania opportunity to provide assurance.

Orders

  • Appeal stayed for 42 days to allow the Respondent to notify Mr Jane and the Court of any assurance prepared to be given.
  • Permission to apply in relation to the wording of any assurance and final disposal of the appeal.