Case details
General
General CaseID UKSC 2011/0264 Case name Assange (Appellant) v The Swedish Judicial Authority (Respondent) Case stage Hearing Scheduled Date of issue 15 Dec 2011 Expedition requested Requested Order being appealed - Date 02 Nov 2011 Order being appealed - Court Divisional Court QBD (EW) Devolution No Human Rights raised Yes Human Rights raised - details Article 5(3) Intervener Yes Summary
Case Summary On appeal from the Divisional Court of the Queen's Bench Division (England and Wales)Issue
Whether a European Arrest Warrant (“EAW”) issued by a public prosecutor is a valid Part 1 EAW issued by a “judicial authority” for the purpose and within the meaning of sections 2 and 66 of the Extradition Act 2003.
Facts
The Appellant, a journalist well known through his operation of Wikileaks, visited Sweden to give a lecture in August 2010. He had sexual relations with two women. Both women went to the police who treated their visits as the filing of complaints. The Appellant was interviewed by police and subsequently left Sweden in ignorance of the fact that a domestic arrest warrant had been issued for him. Proceedings were brought in the Swedish courts in the Appellant’s absence, although he was represented, in which a domestic warrant for the Appellant’s detention for interrogation was granted and upheld on appeal. Subsequently, an EAW for the Appellant was issued by the Swedish Prosecution Authority that set out allegations of four offences of unlawful coercion and sexual misconduct including rape. The EAW was certified by the UK Serious Organised Crime Agency under the Extradition Act 2003. The Appellant surrendered himself for arrest in the UK and, following an extradition hearing, his extradition to Sweden was ordered. The order was upheld on appeal to the Divisional Court.
Subject Matter catchwords for indexingExtradition – European Arrest Warrant – Judicial Authority
Permission to appeal
Permission to appeal Date supporting documents received 15 Dec 2011 Date PTA application referred to justices Date of oral hearing Permission granted/refused Granted Notice of intention to proceed filed Yes
Parties
Parties Appellant name Julian Paul Assange Appellant case due date Appellant case date filed 13 Jan 2012 Respondent name The Swedish Prosecution Authority Date form 3 filed Date form 3 issued Respondent case due date Respondent case date filed 17 Nov 2012 Intervener - names Gerard Batten and Vladimir Bukovsky
Lord AdvocateAppeal
Appeal Justices allocated Yes Justices allocated - names Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers
Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood
Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore
Lord WilsonPTA granted by court below No Statement of facts & issues and Appendix due date Statement of facts & issues and Appendix date filed 12 Jan 2012 Time estimate Time estimate received Time estimate number of days 2 days Hearing date 01 Feb 2012 Other hearing location Core volumes due date Core volumes date filed Authorities due date Authorities date filed Hand down date
My personal view of the world via the articles i read and post, because I believe in that path, mixed with the views of others who sometimes clash with my point of view... very badly at times! Spot which ones they are. DYK that if you had projectbrainsaver type kit you would already know that, and so much more!