ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note is not being maintained. It is being retained for historical interest and to provide practitioners with a quick overview of developments in extradition case law during 2019. This Practice Note tracks extradition appeal cases by month, commencing January 2019. For details of key cases from 2018, see Practice Note: Extradition appeals tracker—2018 decisions [Archived]. Where you know the date of the judgment you are interested in, you can navigate to the relevant table using the list below or the links on the left-hand side of the screen. Alternatively, please search this Practice Note using [CTL]+[F] for the case name, citation or a relevant search term. Extradition appeal cases by month: • January 2019 • February 2019 • March 2019 • April 2019 • May 2019 • June 2019 • July 2019 • August 2019 • September 2019 • October 2019 • November 2019 • December 2019 December 2019 Case Abstract/summary Search terms Asenov v Local Court of Arad Romania [2019] EWHC 3489 (Admin), [2019] All ER (D) 142 (Dec). Extradition—Proportionality. It was not

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not being maintained. It is being retained for historical interest and to provide practitioners with a quick overview of developments in extradition case law during 2020. This tracker includes details of extradition appeals judgments which were given during the UK's Brexit implementation period between 31 January 2020 and 31 December 2020 (IP completion), when the UK continued to be treated as a Member State for the purposes of extradition arrangements with the remaining 27 Member States of the European Union (EU27) and therefore when extradition appeals in respect of these states were dealt with under Part 1 of the Extradition Act 2003 (EA 2003). Section 6 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (EU(W)A 2018) (as amended) provides that retained EU law which has not been modified on or after IP completion day (and questions as to its validity, meaning or effect) is to be interpreted according to retained case law and retained general principles of EU law so far as it is relevant to any matter

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not being maintained. It is being retained for historical interest and to provide practitioners with a quick overview of developments in extradition case law during 2021. Practitioners should note that the European Union (Future Relationship) Act 2020 (EU(FR)A 2020) provides for the domestic implementation of the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA). In particular, EU(FR)A 2020, s 29 provides that domestic law has effect with such modifications as are required for the purposes of implementing the TCA. This statutory provision has the potential to apply to any domestic law. Section 6 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (EU(W)A 2018) (as amended) provides that retained EU law which has not been modified on or after IP completion day (and questions as to its validity, meaning or effect) is to be interpreted according to retained case law and retained general principles of EU law so far as it is relevant to any matter before the court or tribunal. After IP completion day, a UK court or tribunal

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained. This Practice Note tracks extradition appeal cases by month, commencing January 2021. For details of key extradition appeal cases from previous years, see Practice Notes: • Extradition appeals tracker—2021 decisions [Archived] • Extradition appeals tracker—2020 decisions [Archived] • Extradition appeals tracker—2019 decisions [Archived] • Extradition appeals tracker—2018 decisions [Archived] • Extradition appeals tracker—2017 decisions [Archived] Where you know the date of the judgment you are interested in, you can navigate to the relevant table using the list below or the links on the left-hand side of the screen. Alternatively, please search this Practice Note using [CTRL]+[F] for the case name, citation or a relevant search term. Extradition appeal cases by month: • January 2022 • February 2022 • March 2022 • April 2022 • June 2022 • July 2022 • August 2022 • September 2022 • October 2022 • November 2022 • December 2022 December 2022 Case Abstract/summary Search terms R (on the application of Chappell and others) v Secretary of State for the Home

This Checklist provides practitioners with a step by step guide to the procedure of extradition under Part 1 of the Extradition Act 2003 (EA 2003). For a step by step guide to the procedure under EA 2003, Pt 2, see: Extradition from the UK (cat 2 request)—checklist. This should be read in conjunction with Practice Note: Extradition and the statutory framework—an introductory guide which explains both the framework for extradition in the UK as well as the impact Brexit had on extradition between the UK and EU member states and Practice Note: Extradition—arrest and initial procedure which explains the procedures to be followed under both EA 2003, Pts 1 and 2. Category 1 request • Warrants received by the UK are sent to the National Crime Agency (NCA) for certification. • Both arrest warrants and European Arrest Warrants (EAWs) issued before IP Completion Day but not yet executed are governed by the

This Checklist summarises the extradition process from the UK under Part 2 of the Extradition Act 2003 (EA 2003) and the key issues which need to be considered. This should be read in conjunction with Practice Note: Extradition—arrest and initial procedure which explains the procedure to be followed. For extradition under EA 2003, Pt 1, see: Extradition from the UK (cat 1 request)—checklist. Extradition to category 2 territories Where an extradition request is received from a non-EU country with which the UK has a bilateral treaty: • the request is received by the Secretary of State for the Home Department acting through the UK Central Authority at the Home Office (UKCA) • subject to a limited discretion under EA 2003, s 70(2), the Secretary of State must certify the request if it is stated to be for the purpose of prosecuting or punishing a person accused or convicted of an offence in a category 2 territory and if it is made in the required way • once certified,

This Practice Note provides an overview of the procedure and key considerations involved in a full extradition hearing under the Extradition Act 2003 (EA 2003). For further reading around extradition proceedings, see Practice Notes: • Extradition and the statutory framework—an introductory guide • Extradition—arrest and initial procedure • Arrest without a warrant under Part 2 of the Extradition Act 2003 • Secretary of State’s function in extradition • Statutory bars to extradition • Non-statutory bars to extradition • Extradition Appeals For information about the implications of Brexit on extradition arrangements between the UK and EU, see Practice Note: Extradition and the statutory framework—an introductory guide—Extradition to the EU post-Brexit. The extradition hearing At the full extradition hearing, the court determines whether the requested person should be extradited to the requesting state. The hearing, held before a District Judge at Westminster Magistrates’ Court, involves an examination of whether the statutory requirements for extradition under EA 2003 are satisfied, including whether the conduct constitutes an extradition offence (dual criminality, where applicable)

This Checklist summarises the mandatory content required on an extradition request made under the Extradition Act 2003 (EA 2003). This should be read in conjunction with Practice Note: Extradition and the statutory framework—an introductory guide which explains both the framework for extradition in the UK as well as the impact Brexit had on extradition between the UK and EU member states, and Practice Note: Extradition—arrest and initial procedure which explains the procedures to be followed. Mandatory

This Practice Note provides an overview of the initial procedure for UK extradition cases under both Part 1 and Part 2 of the Extradition Act 2003 (EA 2003), including the validity of arrest warrants (Part 1) and extradition requests (Part 2), the arrest of the requested person, the initial extradition hearing and bail considerations. For information on the substantive extradition hearing, see Practice Note: For further reading around extradition proceedings, see Practice Notes: • Extradition and the statutory framework—an introductory guide • Arrest without a warrant under Part 2 of the Extradition Act 2003 • Secretary of State’s function in extradition • Extradition hearings • Statutory bars to extradition • Non-statutory bars to extradition • Extradition Appeals For information about the implications of Brexit on extradition arrangements between the UK and EU, see Practice Note: Extradition and the statutory framework—an introductory guide—Extradition to the EU post-Brexit. Validity of an arrest warrant under EA 2003, Pt 1 EA 2003, Pt 1 governs extradition from category 1 territories, which

A network connecting a group of entities using Internet protocols, but being separate from the Internet. Often parts of an organisations Internet shared with other organisations.

In practice, extraordinary fees are professional charges claimed for work said to fall outside the ordinary scope of a retainer or beyond a standard or scale fee. The expression is descriptive rather than a defined legal term, and is used across several contexts.Typical uses include:- Trusts and estates: claims by trustees, executors or solicitors for remuneration for exceptional services beyond routine administration. Payment usually requires an express charging clause, informed beneficiary consent, or a court order. Courts in England & Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland may authorise additional remuneration where justified.- Insolvency: office-holders may seek additional remuneration for non-routine or particularly complex tasks, subject to creditor, committee or court approval under the applicable insolvency rules.- Litigation costs and publicly funded work: non-standard or enhanced fees (for example, unusually high counsel, expert or interpreter charges) may require prior authority or certification. On assessment/taxation, recovery depends on reasonableness and proportionality, having regard to complexity, urgency, skill, responsibility and results. In Scotland, the formal term is often “additional fee”; in England & Wales and Northern Ireland “non-standard” or “exceptional” costs are more common; in Ireland the Taxing Master/Legal Costs Adjudicator assesses similar claims.Across the UK and Ireland the concept is broadly consistent, but formal labels and approval routes differ. Careful advance authority and detailed evidence are critical.

Until the implementation of the CA 2006, it was practice to refer to any general meeting of the company other than the AGM as an ‘extraordinary general meeting’ or EGM. The CA 2006 now only refers to a general meeting or an AGM. The label ‘extraordinary’ should only be used if required by the articles of association or by contract (such as a shareholders’ agreement).