Martin Henley has recently won two appeals in the High Court both on the grounds that the Appellant’s extradition would be disproportionate to their rights to a family life.
In Pakulski v Poland Mr Justice Mitting allowed the appeal on the basis that the Appellant, who was a recovering alcoholic had managed to rehabilitate himself over a period of 7 years in the UK by remaining sober, apart from two short relapses, rebuilding his life with his highly supportive wife and their 4 children. He had turned his life around by attending regular Alcoholics Anonymous meetings. He had also built a successful construction business employing 4 people and was of good character in the UK. The offences were of some age and were all alcohol related. His version of the chaos in his life was corroborated by the medical notes from several admissions to psychiatric clinics in Poland for treatment for alcoholism. The judge found that there was a risk that the Appellant’s rehabilitation would be put in jeopardy if he were extradited to Poland.
In Wojick v Poland Mr Justice Cranston found that the Appellant’s extradition was disproportionate because of the lengthy delay in issuing the EAW. SOCA on 18 February 2011 was informed that an EAW had been issued they responded saying that Appellant had no connection with the UK. This was incorrect because a caution from 2006 was recorded on the police national computer. It was not until 2 years later that SOCA found an address for the Appellant. SOCA’s failure to find the entry on the PNC was described by the judge as “…a pigs ear…”.
Alun Jones QC shortly to go live on BBC news following the withdrawal of the warrant for the parents of Ashya King
Peter Lange appears in the High Court of Australia in a Constitutional challenge to anti-consorting legislation. Read more.
Chambers welcome Tom Dutton (2012) to chambers following his successful completion of pupillage. Tom is a popular, diligent and hard working person whom has emerged as an asset to chambers already.
Representing the Appellant, a young man from Lithuania, she successfully halted his extradition on the basis that to return him would be a disproportionate breach of his right to a private life because he had been a ‘model citizen’ throughout the ten years he had been in the UK and the offence was committed as a child. (Article 8 ECHR).
Martin Henley’s article for Lexis Nexis on his landmark gambling case can be read in full here.
Chambers are delighted to announce the arrival of Francis O’Toole (2002) formally of Argent Chambers. Francis adds strength and depth to our criminal team.
Thom Dyke appeared for the appellant in R. v Lewis  1 Cr. App. R. 25, CA ( EWCA Crim 2596) (CLW/14/15/6). This case provides valuable guidance to the lower courts as to the validity of an indictment once it is ostensibly stripped of an either way offence, after arraignment.
The Court of Appeal noted that “Mr Dyke has argued that dry issue of law on paper and orally with fortitude and skill”. The full transcript can be read online here.
Hakki v SSDWP & Blair
Martin Henley has successfully appealed the decision of the Upper Tribunal in the Court of Appeal. Had the original decision of the Upper Tribunal stood then potentially millions of regular gamblers might have been liable to pay class 2 NI contributions.
This key judgment reaffirms the authority of Graham v Green which sets out that gambling cannot be a trade adventure profession or vocation. This authority of the High Court had stood for 90 years and had never been challenged in the Court of Appeal.
The Upper Tribunal had found that, in the context of Social Security, gambling could be a trade profession or vocation thus meaning that Mr Hakki whose only source of income had been from playing poker would be assessable for child maintenance under the Child Support Act.
The Court of Appeal declined to overturn Graham v Green and found that Mr Hakki’s poker playing was not a seeking after emoluments and was therefore not a trade profession or vocation. They further found that contrary to the finding of the Upper Tribunal the income tax regime and the social security regimes were aligned such that the definition of self employment in the social security context could not have a wider meaning than the income tax definition.
Laura Herbert successfully argues Article 8 Human Rights in Extradition request from Czech Republic.
Before Westminster Magistrates’ Court the District Judge found in favour of Ms Herbert’s arguments, holding that the Czech Republic had requested her client for a non ‘extradition offence’ and that it would be a disproportionate breach of her right to family life to extradite.