Jansons v Latvia [2009] EWHC 1845 (Admin) (18 March 2009)

Jansons v Latvia [2009] EWHC 1845 (Admin) (18 March 2009)

It would be oppressive under section 25 of the Extradition Act 2003 to order the claimant's extradition to Latvia because uncontested psychiatric evidence establishes a substantial and near-certain risk that he will commit suicide if extradited, and this risk outweighs the public interest in extradition even considering the seriousness of the offences and the adequacy of Latvian prison arrangements.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 1845 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Jansons; Defendant: Latvia
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Extradition Appeal / High Court Appeal Against Extradition Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed; extradition order quashed; claimant discharged.
Legal Topics
European Arrest Warrant, Article 3 ECHR, Article 8 ECHR, Mental Health and Extradition, Oppression Under Extradition Act 2003
Extradition Law Human Rights Law Criminal Law European Arrest Warrant Article 3 ECHR Article 8 ECHR Mental Health and Extradition Oppression Under Extradition Act 2003

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

Parties

Jansons

Claimant

Latvia

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Extradition Appeal / High Court Appeal Against Extradition Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extradition would be oppressive under section 25 of the Extradition Act 2003 due to risk of suicide
  2. 2 Whether extradition would violate Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights
  3. 3 Whether extradition would be disproportionate under Article 8 (right to private and family life) ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

It would be oppressive under section 25 of the Extradition Act 2003 to order the claimant's extradition to Latvia because uncontested psychiatric evidence establishes a substantial and near-certain risk that he will commit suicide if extradited, and this risk outweighs the public interest in extradition even considering the seriousness of the offences and the adequacy of Latvian prison arrangements.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; extradition order quashed; claimant discharged.

Orders

  • Order for discharge of claimant from extradition proceedings
  • Order quashing the extradition order