Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
This is an appeal pursuant to sections 26 and 27 of the Extradition Act 2003 (“the Act”) against the order for extradition made by DJ Pilling in a judgment delivered on 6 March 2025 (“the Judgment”) pursuant to an accusation warrant issued by the Local Court of Görlitz, Germany (“the Warrant”).
The Warrant relates to 19 alleged offences of conspiracy to steal, namely, 10 offences of aggravated gang theft and 9 offences of attempted aggravated gang theft between 31 August 2019 and 22 September 2019 in Görlitz and Bautzen, Germany.
Ground 1 is that the judge was wrong to find that the requirements of section 2 of the Act were met, because the alleged conduct was insufficiently particularised.
Ground 2 is that the judge was wrong to find that the requirements of section 10 of the Act were met, as the conduct described did not amount to an offence in the UK.
Ground 3 is that the Judge was wrong to find that it was proportionate to extradite the appellant under s.21A(1)(b) of the Act.
Auto-extracted from The National Archives. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
[2025] UKUT 168 (AAC)
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.