Case No: CO/994/2022
In the High Court of Justice
Queen’s Bench Division
13 June 2022
The Honourable Mr Justice Jay
Judicial Court of the Judicial District in Aveiro, Portugal
NOTIFICATION of the Judge’s decision (Crim PR 50.22)
Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Appellant and the Respondent
ORDER by the Honourable Mr Justice Jay
1. Application for anonymity under r.39.2 granted. The Appellant to be anonymised as RG and his son as S.
2. The application for permission to appeal is refused.
3. Application for the representation order to extend to leading counsel also refused.
4. There shall be detailed assessment of the Appellant’s legal aid costs
1. Adjournment: the DJ had a discretion as to whether to adjourn these proceedings pending the outcome of the proceedings in the Family Court, and there is nothing to suggest that she erred in principle. There is a clear public interest in avoiding delay in extradition proceedings. Given the factual findings in the Family Court, which in my opinion were clear, the DJ was entitled to proceed as she did. No issue of principle arises.
2. A8. The DJ conducted the standard balancing exercise. She took into account the nature of the offence, the delay (most of it being RG’s responsibility), RG’s health issues and the fact that he was a fugitive. It cannot be said that the DJ arguably erred.
3. Brexit uncertainty: although it may well be that RG would find it difficult to return to the UK, there is no uncertainty as such. This argument does not appear to have pressed before the DJ.
4. S.25/oppression. The DJ was entitled to conclude that RG’s il-health was not sufficiently serious to engage this provision.