![AC-2023-LON-001921 - [2025] EWHC 1416 (Admin)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_fi51A75.png){kind=logo}
Heading
Neutral Citation Number: [2025] EWHC 1416 (Admin)
Case No: AC-2023-LON-001921
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
KING'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
SITTING IN LONDON
Thursday, 16th October 2025
Before:
FORDHAM J
Between:
STANISLAV PRISACARI | Appellant |
- and - | |
TRIBUNAL JUDICIAIRE DE PARIS, FRANCE | Respondent |
Ania Grudzinska (instructed by Hollingsworth Edwards) for the Appellant
Jonathan Swain (instructed by CPS) for the Respondent
Hearing dates: 8.4.25 & 9.10.25
Draft judgments: 3.6.25 & 10.10.25
Approved Judgment
FORDHAM J
This Judgment was handed down remotely at 10am on 16 October 2025 by
circulation to the parties by email and by release to the National Archives.
- Heading
- FORDHAM J
- PART 2. THE ORIGINAL JUDGMENT
- Qualifying Curfew in UK and French Domestic Law
- Four Components
- A and Doga
- Expert Evidence and the Chance to Respond
- Further Information and a Reply
- Background
- Evidence Ventilated in Previous Cases
- A Sole Viable Point
- The Article 26/624 Mechanism
- Deprivation of Liberty
- Article 716-4 of the French Code
- “Detention” and ‘Exclusive Competence’ of the IJA
- Responsibilities of the EJA
- These EMCs are not a Deprivation of Liberty
- Restriction of Liberty
- Article 142-11 of the French Code
- The French Appellate Courts
- The French Supreme Court’s Review Role
- Qualifying Curfew and ‘Exclusive Competence’ of the IJA
- EMHA is an Evaluative Question
- Article 142-11 is a Duty
- Very Clear Cut
- The Evidence
- This Case
- Conclusion
- PART 3. THE RESPONDENT’S REQUEST
- Andrysiewicz
- The Request
- Injustice
- Very Clear-Cut
- Conclusions