Extradition appeal dismissed for Pawel Kalandyk

Introduction

The High Court of Justice, King's Bench Division, recently dismissed an appeal by Pawel Kalandyk against his extradition to Poland. The appeal was heard by Mrs Justice Collins Rice, who upheld the decision of the District Judge to extradite Mr Kalandyk to serve a prison sentence imposed in Poland.

Background

Mr Kalandyk's extradition was sought following an arrest warrant issued by Polish authorities, relating to a sentence passed in 2015 for offences including driving while disqualified and assault. The warrant was certified by the UK National Crime Agency in March 2023. Extradition was ordered by District Judge Cieciora after a hearing in July 2023, where Mr Kalandyk represented himself and resisted extradition on grounds of absence from proceedings in Poland and the impact on his family life. The District Judge rejected these objections.

Mr Kalandyk's Appeal

Upon obtaining legal representation, Mr Kalandyk appealed the decision, focusing on his absence from Polish proceedings. Permission to appeal was granted on the basis of new evidence relating to a recent CJEU judgment, LU and PH v Ministry of Justice and Equality, which addressed issues of trial in absentia.

Legal Analysis

The appeal centred on whether Mr Kalandyk was tried in his absence and whether he deliberately absented himself. The High Court examined the CJEU's decision in LU & PH, which clarified when a trial in absentia might bar extradition. However, Mrs Justice Collins Rice found that Mr Kalandyk had deliberately absented himself from proceedings, having been aware of the consequences.

The Polish Criminal Proceedings

Mr Kalandyk attended two of the three hearings in Gdansk in 2015 but was absent for the final hearing where he was convicted and sentenced. The District Judge found he had been notified of the hearing date and deliberately absented himself. Subsequent proceedings in Poland activated his suspended sentence due to further offences and failure to pay compensation.

Consideration of the Appeal

Mrs Justice Collins Rice considered the activation of Mr Kalandyk's suspended sentence, which was based on multiple factors, including subsequent convictions in Poland and Germany. The Court concluded that the Polish conviction in absentia was not the sole basis for the activation, and therefore, the extradition could proceed.

Conclusion

The High Court dismissed Mr Kalandyk's appeal, finding no legal basis to bar extradition under section 20 of the Extradition Act 2003. The Court upheld the District Judge's findings and concluded that Mr Kalandyk had unequivocally waived his right to attend the proceedings by deliberately absenting himself.

Implications

This case reaffirms the principles governing extradition proceedings, particularly regarding trials in absentia and the activation of suspended sentences. It highlights the importance of understanding the implications of absconding from legal proceedings in one jurisdiction while residing in another.

Learn More

Explore essential areas of UK employment law, including contracts, workplace policies, and discrimination.