AC-2023-LON-002337 - [2025] EWHC 1985 (Admin)

Fecha: 29-Jul-2025

The Grounds of Appeal

The Grounds of Appeal

25.

The original perfected Grounds of Appeal, dated 18 September 2023, assert that the SDJ erred in concluding that:

Extradition was not oppressive under section 91 of the of the 2003 Act (Ground 1); this involves consideration of:

The Applicant's mental illness and risk of suicide.

Whether the SDJ's findings on the Applicant being “not seriously unwell” and having a “low risk of suicide” were correct.

The sufficiency of information regarding the conditions and regime of detention in the USA as it pertains to his health.

The impact of the decision in Criminal Proceedings Against EDL (Case C-699/21) on the interpretation of section 91.

ii)

Extradition would be compatible with Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”), specifically concerning prison conditions and the risk of the Applicant being subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment (Ground 2); This encompasses:

The risk of sexual assault and the efficacy of protective measures.

The Applicant's potential detention in a Special Housing Unit (“SHU”) and whether such conditions would amount to inhumanity or inefficacy of protective measures.

iii)

Extradition would be compatible with the Applicant's rights under Article 14 ECHR and the treatment he would be subject to in the USA, particularly concerning disproportionately severe conditions based on his sexual orientation (Ground 3).

26.

In addition to these existing grounds, the Applicant seeks leave to amend the original Grounds of Appeal to add two new grounds, advanced pursuant to section 81(b) of the 2003 Act. By these proposed new grounds, the Applicant contends that there is a real risk of prejudice in relation to the conditions of his detention by reason of his foreign nationality, and by reason of his sexual orientation. These grounds overlap with the existing grounds in so far as they turn on conditions of detention and the impact of the Applicant’s sexuality on the risks he may face in custody. Their addition is opposed by the Respondent.

27.

The Applicant seeks to adduce additional material in support of these proposed new grounds, including Executive Orders of President Joe Biden and President Donald Trump, expert reports from Martin Sabelli and Samuel Weiss regarding the real risk of incarceration in CAR prisons, and an expert report from Emma Kaufman on “Segregation by Citizenship”, as well as an article by Jade Wilson concerning the impact on LGBT+ individuals. It is submitted that the main body of evidence supporting these new grounds was already before the SDJ in the context of the existing ECHR challenges under Article 3 and Article 14. The Respondent's objections to the admissibility of the new grounds and evidence, are, principally, that they could and should have been raised before the SDJ and that section 81(b) does not cover “prejudice in relation to conditions of detention” but rather prejudice at trial or the fact of detention, not its quality. The Respondent nevertheless accepted that I should consider the new grounds and supporting material in the context of their potential impact on the issues raised and relied on by the Applicant before reaching a formal conclusion on their admission.