In Lukaszewski & Ors, R (Halligen) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] UKSC 20, the UK Supreme Court was required to consider the tricky issue of time limits in extradition proceedings. Three Polish citizens, who were the subjects of European Arrest Warrants, and one British citizen (Halligen) were the parties involved. The extradition of each of the parties had been ordered. The time-period for giving notice of appeal against an extradition order was 7 days in the case of the Polish appellants and 14 days in the case of the British citizen. The sealed front page of the Polish appellants’ notices of appeal were faxed to the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) within the 7 day time limit, but not the grounds of appeal. Halligen’s solicitors filed his notice of appeal within the time limit and the appellant himself wrote to the Home Office informing them of the notice and his intent to appeal. However, Halligen’s notice and grounds of appeal did not reach the CPS and Home Office until after the 14 days.
The issue therefore was whether the appellants had given notice of appeal within the applicable time limits. The Supreme Court primarily followed the case of Mucelli v Government of Albania [2009] 1 WLR 27, where it had been held that ‘notice of an appeal within the relevant permitted period’ meant that an appeal had to be both filed and served on all the respondents within such a period. Although the Supreme Court applied Mucelli, it modified the principles significantly. The court held that, “I would not therefore depart from Mucelli in so far as it requires not merely filing an appeal, but also some form of notice of an appeal being given to the respondents, both within the permitted period, but the question remains what form of notice of an appeal is required…in my view a generous view can and should be taken of this”. Therefore, the court concluded that while it is important that respondents are notified, it is not of utmost importance what form this notice took.
Click here to read a post from the UK Supreme Court Blog on the Lukaszewski case.