UKSC/2019/0210

Zabolotnyi (Appellant) v The Mateszalka District Court, Hungary (Respondent)

Judgment given

Case summary


Case ID

UKSC/2019/0210

Parties

Appellant(s)

Zabolotnyi (AP)

Respondent(s)

The Mateszalka District Court

Issue

This case concerns conditions in Hungarian prisons, and the approach to be taken in assessing and relying on assurances as to prison conditions given by the Hungarian authorities. The Supreme Court is asked to decide, when a court is considering whether to make or uphold an extradition order, and is obliged to assess an assurance given to the UK regarding future detention: (1) Is there a special test for admitting evidence relating to assurances given to the courts or authorities of countries other than the United Kingdom? (2) If so, was the High Court right that the court should exercise very considerable caution before admitting such evidence and that it should only do so if satisfied that the evidence is manifestly credible, directly relevant to the issue to be decided and of real importance for the purpose of that decision?

Facts

The respondent, the Mateszalka District Court, Hungary, sought the extradition of the appellant, Mr Zabolotnyi, to Hungary pursuant to a European Arrest Warrant. On 5 September 2017, the District Judge ordered Mr Zabolotnyi’s extradition to Hungary. Mr Zabolotnyi appealed to the High Court. During his extradition hearing, Mr Zabolotnyi had argued that he faced a real risk of being detained in overcrowded prison conditions in Hungary, in breach of his rights under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Hungarian Ministry of Justice gave an assurance guaranteeing that, if extradited, Mr Zabolotnyi would be held in conditions compliant with Article 3. However, Mr Zabolotnyi argued that this assurance was unreliable. On appeal to the High Court, he sought to rely on fresh evidence from individuals extradited to Hungary from both the UK and Germany who complained that they had been subject to comparable assurances which were not honoured. The High Court held that there was no substantial risk that Mr Zabolotnyi’s Article 3 rights would be breached if he was extradited to Hungary. It held that evidence of past breaches of assurances given to other member states would only be admissible if it was manifestly credible, directly relevant to the issue to be decided and of real importance for the purpose of that decision. Applying that test to Mr Zabolotnyi’s case, the evidence relating to breaches of the German assurances was held to be inadmissible. The evidence concerning the UK assurances was considered to be limited. The appeal was dismissed. Mr Zabolotnyi now appeals against that ruling to the Supreme Court.

Date of issue

22 October 2019

Judgment appealed

Judgment details


Judgment date

30 April 2021

Neutral citation

[2021] UKSC 14

Judgment summary

30 April 2021

Appeal


Justices

Hearing dates

Start date

23 February 2021

End date

23 February 2021

Watch hearings


23 February 2021 - Morning session

23 February 2021 - Afternoon session

Change log

Last updated 16 April 2024

Back to top

Sign up for updates about this case

Sign up to receive email alerts when this case is updated.