Grozovs v Kraslava District Court

Grozovs v Kraslava District Court

The appeal was rejected because the medical evidence could have been obtained with reasonable diligence before the extradition hearing and thus was not admissible on appeal. Even if admitted, the evidence did not establish that extradition would be oppressive under section 25.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Viktors Grozovs; Defendant: Kraslava District Court
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 January 2012
Procedural Posture
Extradition Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Extradition Act 2003, Oppression Due to Medical Condition, Admissibility of Fresh Evidence on Appeal
Criminal Law Extradition Extradition Act 2003 Oppression Due to Medical Condition Admissibility of Fresh Evidence on Appeal

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Viktors Grozovs

Claimant

Kraslava District Court

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Extradition Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extradition would be oppressive due to the appellant's medical condition
  2. 2 Whether fresh medical evidence should be admitted on appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was rejected because the medical evidence could have been obtained with reasonable diligence before the extradition hearing and thus was not admissible on appeal. Even if admitted, the evidence did not establish that extradition would be oppressive under section 25.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Extradition order upheld
  • Public funding assessment of the appellant's costs