The conduct described in an extradition request by the United States in respect of allegations of conspiracy to fix prices and obstructing the course of justice in the US were extradition offences under the Extradition Act 2003 s.137 because if carried out in England the conduct would have amounted to English offences.
EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
Where the United States Embassy had issued Diplomatic Notes assuring the United Kingdom that the appellants would not be designated enemy combatants or be subject to the death penalty following extradition, the judge had been correct to say that extradition was not incompatible with their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 .
A judge in an extradition hearing was entitled to conclude that neither the mental health condition of the person sought to be extradited nor the passage of time rendered his extradition to Latvia unjust or oppressive under the Extradition Act 2003.
There was no reason to interfere with the conviction and sentence of a teenage boy in relation to four counts of rape of a very young boy. Despite inconsistencies between the differing accounts of the victim and two young witnesses the trial judge had been entitled to conclude that it was for the jury to consider the victim’s reliability as a witness.
The stop and search regime in the Terrorism Act 2000 did not give rise to violations of the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 .