[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions >> Bigos v District Court In Tarnobrzeg, Poland [2012] EWHC 2809 (Admin) (26 September 2012) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2012/2809.html Cite as: [2012] EWHC 2809 (Admin)

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

		Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL
		26 September 2012

1. MR JUSTICE BEAN: This is an appeal by Mr Bigos against an order of District Judge Evans at the Westminster Magistrates' Court on 1 August this year directing that he be extradited to Poland. He is wanted on an accusation warrant, the allegations being that in 2007 he committed three offences of illicit trafficking in drugs.
2. He has been before the courts in this country for a number of relatively minor matters, but they do not affect the extradition warrant.
3. Before the District Judge an application was made for an adjournment on the grounds that Mr Bigos had suffered an injury to his head at work in April. For this reason, and also because he had become an alcoholic, counsel before the District Judge wanted to obtain expert medical evidence. Mr Bigos also sought to argue that his life might be in danger in Poland. The judge refused to adjourn the case.
4. Mr Bigos has raised essentially the same points before me today. The notice of appeal, lodged by the firm of Christian Khan on his behalf, puts forward a single ground: that the judge should have ordered his discharge pursuant to section 25 of the Act because his physical or mental condition, namely the fact that he is withdrawing from the effects of alcoholism, should be a barrier to his extradition.
5. However, there is a presumption in law that the authorities in a European requesting state such as Poland can provide appropriate medical care (see the recent decision of the Divisional Court in Stopyra v Poland). The District Judge observed:

i. "It is quite ridiculous to suppose that Poland will be unable to provide reasonable medical care for a man with an historic head injury and who is an alcoholic."

6. Mr Bigos has raised a second ground before me. It is not in the written notice of appeal, but it was obviously raised before the District Judge, and in those circumstances it is clearly right that I should consider it. It is set out in paragraph 8 of the District Judge's decision. Mr Bigos claimed to have received threats by gangsters, part of a 15 or 16-strong group, who have told him that if he goes back to Poland he will be killed. He is still receiving these threats online and via the Polish equivalent of Facebook.
7. In October 2007 on two occasions, about two weeks apart, he was attacked by gang members who assaulted him. He received injuries: bruises, a black eye and a nose bleed, but did not seek medical treatment. He had fallen out with the gang because, following his arrest for these drug offences, he was persuaded to become an informer. Again, however, there is a presumption that the Polish state, and in particular the prison authorities, will be able to provide people in custody there with proper protection from inter-prisoner violence. Of course, after his release from custody, it is a matter for him where he goes. Even if what he says about this gang is true, it cannot be a ground for blocking extradition. It follows that the appeal must be dismissed.