Zaporozhchenko & Anor v Westminster Magistrates' Court & Ors

Zaporozhchenko & Anor v Westminster Magistrates' Court & Ors

The statutory two-month period under section 99(3) of the Extradition Act 2003, expressed as 'starting with' the appropriate day, includes the day the case is sent to the Secretary of State. Therefore, the period expired on 2 November 2010, and the Secretary of State's order made on 3 November 2010 was out of time. The claimants were entitled to discharge.

Parties
Claimant: Vitaliy Zaporozhchenko; Claimant: Iulia Redya; Defendant: Westminster Magistrates’ Court; Defendant: Secretary of State for the Home Department; Interested Party: Government of Ukraine
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 January 2011
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim for judicial review allowed; claimants discharged.
Legal Topics
Statutory Interpretation, Time Limits in Extradition Proceedings, Calculation of Statutory Periods
Extradition Law Administrative Law Statutory Interpretation Time Limits in Extradition Proceedings Calculation of Statutory Periods

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vitaliy Zaporozhchenko

Claimant

Iulia Redya

Claimant

Westminster Magistrates’ Court

Defendant

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Defendant

Government of Ukraine

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Secretary of State's order for extradition was made within the statutory two-month period under section 99 of the Extradition Act 2003
  2. 2 How to calculate the statutory period 'starting with' a specified day under the Extradition Act 2003

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory two-month period under section 99(3) of the Extradition Act 2003, expressed as 'starting with' the appropriate day, includes the day the case is sent to the Secretary of State. Therefore, the period expired on 2 November 2010, and the Secretary of State's order made on 3 November 2010 was out of time. The claimants were entitled to discharge.

Court Disposition

Claim for judicial review allowed; claimants discharged.

Orders

  • Decision of District Judge Tubbs quashed.
  • Claimants discharged under section 99(2) of the Extradition Act 2003.