Toloii v Gaesti Court: High Court upholds extradition order for Romanian tree-felling conviction

The High Court has dismissed an appeal against the extradition of Nicolae-Alfredo Toloii to Romania, where he faces an eight-month prison sentence for illegal tree-felling offences committed in 2014. Mr Justice Dexter Dias delivered the judgement on 20 October 2025, upholding the original extradition order made by District Judge Sarah Turnock at Westminster Magistrates' Court.

The case concerned Mr Toloii, a Romanian national born in 1994, who was convicted in his absence by a Romanian court in June 2018 for illegally felling two oak trees and three hornbeam trees from the Valea Mare Forest District in September 2014. The sentence became final in July 2018 when no appeal was lodged.

The appellant had made extensive admissions to Romanian police in May 2016, acknowledging that he and an accomplice had cut down the trees without authorisation and intended to sell the wood for profit. Shortly after being formally charged, Toloii left Romania for the United Kingdom in 2017 without informing the authorities of his change of address, despite being legally obligated to do so under Article 108 of the Romanian Criminal Procedure Code.

The appeal centred on two primary grounds. First, whether Toloii had deliberately absented himself from his trial under section 20 of the Extradition Act 2003. The appellant argued that whilst formal charges had been laid, no indictment had been issued under Romanian procedure at the time he left the country, suggesting he could not have known with certainty that a trial would follow.

Mr Justice Dexter Dias rejected this argument, applying the Supreme Court's recent guidance in Bertino v Italy [2024] UKSC 9. The court found that Toloii had demonstrated an "unequivocal waiver" of his right to be present at trial. The judgement emphasised that the appellant was aware of the criminal proceedings and charges against him, had made detailed admissions of guilt, and had deliberately placed himself beyond the reach of Romanian justice.

The timing of Toloii's departure proved particularly significant. The court noted a "highly suspicious" temporal connection between a summons being sent to his Romanian family address on 24 November 2017 and his application for a UK National Insurance number on 12 December 2017, suggesting his move was "deliberately engineered to avoid" prosecution.

The second ground concerned Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, with the appellant arguing that extradition would disproportionately interfere with his family life in the UK, where he lives with his partner and two young children. The court acknowledged the impact on the family but concluded it did not reach the "exceptionally severe" threshold required to outweigh the public interest in extradition, as established in Andrysiewicz v Poland [2025] UKSC 23.

The judgement noted that Toloii's partner, also a Romanian national, had recently spent six months living with his family in Romania with their children, undermining claims that return would be impossible. Furthermore, the appellant's immigration status in the UK remained precarious following Brexit, with his application for settled status having been rejected.

Mr Justice Dexter Dias emphasised that whilst the eight-month sentence for tree-felling would likely not result in imprisonment in the UK, the court must respect the judgement of properly constituted Romanian courts and the principle of mutual confidence between European jurisdictions.

The decision reinforces the high threshold required for Article 8 challenges to succeed in extradition cases, particularly where the requested person is deemed a fugitive who has built their life abroad whilst evading justice.