AC-2024-LON-002386 - [2025] EWHC 2999 (Admin)

The Appellant submitted that the District Judge understated the impact of extradition on the family unit. The family may have to move from their adapted home, requiring the Appellant’s children to potentially change schools and lose friendships while coping with the loss of their father for a significant time.

The Respondent submitted that the impact on the children and family was given sufficient weight in the Judgment. This is not a sole carer case and while the family may have to move, provision for alternative housing in their local area is possible and the Appellant’s wife would continue to receive social benefits and other eligible support.

The Judge identified the interests of the Appellant’s children as being a primary consideration observing:

“73.

…However, due to his own health issues, the RP is not the primary carer for the children and based on the evidence of the RP’s health difficulties, unlikely to be assisting with any day-to-day care for the children. If the RP is extradited, inevitably there will be an emotional impact for the children not seeing their father on a day-to-day basis, but they will remain in the care of their mother who is, and will remain, their primary caregiver. I perceived the RP’s wife will be freed from her caring duties for the RP and likely have more time to address the needs of the children to mitigate any impact from the loss of the RP’s presence.

74.

The RP’s wife’s witness statement detailed that she would struggle financially without the RP’s additional benefit income. If the RP is extradited, it is likely they will have to move from the property they currently reside in as it is a disability adapted home. If extradited, the RP’s partner would be the sole carer for 3 minor children. I am sure she would be entitled to state financial assistance, she is already in receipt of some, and the Local Authority would have an obligation to house her due to the children. I accept she may lose her current accommodation given it is a disability adapted home, but she will still be entitled to state assistance and housing support. In my view, moving to an alternative property is not an exceptional consequence of extradition rendering extradition disproportionate. Whilst there may be some financial hardship due to a reduced benefit income, the RP or his wife have not demonstrated, on evidence, that the hardship experienced by the RP wife and children will go beyond that normally experienced during extradition.”