Prosecutor General's Office (Lithuania) v Michailov

Prosecutor General's Office (Lithuania) v Michailov

The district judge's refusal to seek further information from Lithuania regarding the respondent's detention conditions was irrational. The combination of problematic prison conditions and the respondent's health vulnerabilities engaged the second stage of Aranyosi, requiring supplementary information. The generic assurances provided did not address the respondent's specific needs. The appeal is adjourned to allow for further information to be sought.

Parties
Applicant: Prosecutor General's Office (Lithuania); Respondent: Michailov
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Extradition Appeal / Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal Adjourned
Outcome
permission to appeal granted; substantive appeal adjourned
Legal Topics
Extradition Proceedings, ECHR Article 3, Prison Conditions, Mental and Physical Health, Case Management, Assurances in Extradition
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Extradition Law Extradition Proceedings ECHR Article 3 Prison Conditions Mental and Physical Health Case Management +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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Prosecutor General's Office (Lithuania)

Applicant

Michailov

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Extradition Appeal / Permission to Appeal and Substantive Appeal Adjourned

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extradition of the respondent to Lithuania would breach Article 3 ECHR due to prison conditions and his health vulnerabilities
  2. 2 Whether the district judge erred in refusing to seek further information from Lithuania regarding the respondent's detention conditions
  3. 3 Whether the respondent's vulnerabilities preclude imprisonment in any jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

The district judge's refusal to seek further information from Lithuania regarding the respondent's detention conditions was irrational. The combination of problematic prison conditions and the respondent's health vulnerabilities engaged the second stage of Aranyosi, requiring supplementary information. The generic assurances provided did not address the respondent's specific needs. The appeal is adjourned to allow for further information to be sought.

Court Disposition

permission to appeal granted; substantive appeal adjourned

Orders

  • Directions to be given for parties to agree questions and materials to be put to the Lithuanian judicial authority regarding detention conditions for the respondent.
  • Adjourned hearing to consider responses and any further evidence.