Latvia v Ancevskis No.2, Application for Judicial Review [2023] NIKB 21 (22 February 2023)

Latvia v Ancevskis No.2, Application for Judicial Review [2023] NIKB 21 (22 February 2023)

The refusal by the County Court to adjourn proceedings to allow the appellant to assemble fresh evidence for his Article 8 ECHR claim constituted a breach of the procedural dimension of Article 8, as the appellant was deprived of a fair opportunity to present relevant evidence. Judicial review is available to remedy such procedural breaches where statutory appeal does not provide an adequate remedy.

Citation
[2023] NIKB 21
Parties
Respondent/interested Party: General Prosecutor’s Office of Latvia; Appellant/applicant: Maris Ancevskis; Respondent to the Judicial Review: Ms Marie-Claire McDermott
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
22 February 2023
Procedural Posture
Extradition Appeal and Judicial Review / Appeal From County Court and Application for Judicial Review Before High Court
Outcome
Statutory appeal dismissed; leave to apply for judicial review granted; County Court decision quashed; costs orders made
Legal Topics
Extradition Act 2003, Article 8 ECHR, Judicial Review, Procedural Fairness, Human Rights Act 1998
Extradition Law Human Rights Law Administrative Law Extradition Act 2003 Article 8 ECHR Judicial Review Procedural Fairness Human Rights Act 1998

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 23 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

General Prosecutor’s Office of Latvia

Respondent/interested Party

Maris Ancevskis

Appellant/applicant

Ms Marie-Claire McDermott

Respondent to the Judicial Review

Procedural Posture

Extradition Appeal and Judicial Review / Appeal From County Court and Application for Judicial Review Before High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the County Court erred in refusing to adjourn extradition proceedings to allow the appellant to gather fresh evidence for his Article 8 ECHR claim
  2. 2 Whether the refusal constituted a breach of the procedural dimension of Article 8 ECHR
  3. 3 Whether judicial review is available to challenge an extradition order on procedural grounds not accommodated by statutory appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The refusal by the County Court to adjourn proceedings to allow the appellant to assemble fresh evidence for his Article 8 ECHR claim constituted a breach of the procedural dimension of Article 8, as the appellant was deprived of a fair opportunity to present relevant evidence. Judicial review is available to remedy such procedural breaches where statutory appeal does not provide an adequate remedy.

Court Disposition

Statutory appeal dismissed; leave to apply for judicial review granted; County Court decision quashed; costs orders made

Orders

  • Statutory appeal against extradition order dismissed
  • Leave to apply for judicial review granted