Category: interpretation

Neave and others v Court of Rome, Italy: [2012] EWHC 358 (Admin);  [2012] WLR (D)  46

“In the context of the Extradition Act 2003 a person who was no more than a suspect was not an accused person. The mere suspicion that an individual had committed offences was insufficient to place him in the category of ‘accused’ persons. The dividing line between a suspect wanted for questioning and an accused person was fact specific and was complicated by the fact of the different legal systems in Part 1 countries. A purposive interpretation of ‘accused’ was to be adopted in order to accommodate the differences between legal systems. Courts had to adopt a cosmopolitan approach to the question whether, as a matter of substance rather than form, the requirement of there being an ‘accused’ person was satisfied. Resolving the issue would require an intense focus on the particular facts of each case. The fact that under the criminal procedure of the requesting state a person might be asked further questions before a decision was made to charge him was not decisive, as also was the absence of a full file. A person could be accused of an offence even though the decision had not finally been taken to prosecute or charge.”

WLR Daily, 23rd February 2012

Source: www.iclr.co.uk