[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 >> Klimento v Westminster Magistrates' Court [2012] EWHC 1616 (Admin) (30 May 2012) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2012/1616.html Cite as: [2012] EWHC 1616 (Admin)

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

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

		Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL
		30 May 2012

SHORT JUDGMENT
1. THE VICE PRESIDENT: We propose to put our reasons in writing and deliver them later in the usual way, but it seems to us that it is in everyone's interests that you should know the outcome on which we are agreed. The application will be allowed. We quash the District Judge's decision of 16th April 2012 under which he rescinded ("quashed") the extradition order. In so far as he intended to set aside the consent procedure, we quash that also. The effect is that the extradition order originally made, following consent, is reinstated. That, we think, is all that we need to say at the moment. We will put our reasons in writing in the usual way. Do you want to deal with any ancillary question which arises at this point or do you want to do it after you have seen the reasons?
2. MISS MALCOLM: For my part the only application is one for legal aid taxation and there is no reason why that should not be done now.
3. THE VICE PRESIDENT: There will not be any other, will there?
4. MISS MALCOLM: No.
5. THE VICE PRESIDENT: Then that follows, I should have thought. Yes. Legal aid taxation, Miss Malcolm, of the applicant's costs.
6. MISS MALCOLM: I am told the wording is "legal aid to be assessed on the usual terms."
7. THE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes.
8. MISS MALCOLM: The only other issue, it is merely a matter of clarification, would it be appropriate to say "in so far as he intended to set aside the consent procedure we quash that intention also". So there is no suggestion that you were quashing the consent procedure.
9. THE VICE PRESIDENT: I see. All right. What you had better say is this: "In so far as he intended to make an order setting aside the consent procedure, we quash that order." That makes it clearer. You are quite right. Thank you.
10. MR HEARN: My Lord, one matter. Am I correct to understand that your intention is for that order to come into force today?
11. THE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes.
12. MR HEARN: I am grateful.
13. THE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes. What happens after that is, I think, beyond our powers. But that is why we are giving you the decision now.
14. On that basis, you will have sight of the drafts in the usual way. Please provide us with typographical or factual errors. Subject to there arising anything else, and I cannot imagine that there will, but subject to that, there is no need for anybody to attend when the reasons are handed down.