Chromczuk v Poland: Extradition, Polish Prison Conditions and Article 3 ECHR
George Hepburne-Scott represented Lukasz Chromczuk and Krzysztof Szulejewski in High Court extradition proceedings concerning Poland and Article 3 ECHR. In Chromczuk & Ors v Polish Judicial Authority [2026] EWHC 2276 (Admin), the High Court considered whether recent evidence concerning conditions in Polish prisons was sufficient to reopen an Article 3 challenge to extradition.
The High Court Proceedings
The applications arose from extradition orders made pursuant to Polish judicial warrants. Chromczuk and Szulejewski came before Mrs Justice Foster DBE on renewed applications for permission to appeal. A central issue was whether developments in the evidence concerning Polish prison conditions justified advancing a fresh challenge under Article 3 ECHR, which prohibits torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
The applicants argued that the position had materially changed since the High Court's earlier consideration of Polish prison conditions in Litvinchuk & Ors v Regional Court, Zamosc, Poland & Ors [2021] EWHC 2735 (Admin) and Krampa v Regional Court in Gdansk (Poland) [2023] EWHC 1587 (Admin).
New Evidence About Polish Prison Conditions
A significant feature of the applications was a May 2026 decision of the Schleswig-Holstein Higher Regional Court in Germany. That court had considered recent material concerning Polish prison conditions and refused extradition after concluding that there were indications of systemic deficiencies capable of producing prison conditions incompatible with human rights.
George Hepburne-Scott submitted that the German decision, considered together with more recent reports from Poland's National Mechanism for the Prevention of Torture (KMPT) and other post-Krampa material, justified a fresh assessment of the Article 3 position. The argument focused on the cumulative effect of evidence concerning recurring deficiencies in safeguards intended to prevent ill-treatment in Polish prisons.
The Article 3 Test in Extradition Cases
The High Court reviewed the established principles governing Article 3 ECHR in extradition proceedings. Extradition is prohibited where there are substantial grounds for believing that a requested person would face a real risk of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment. However, there is a strong presumption that Council of Europe and EU states will comply with their Article 3 obligations, requiring clear, cogent and compelling evidence to displace that presumption.
The court considered the staged approach derived from Aranyosi, under which sufficiently strong evidence of prison conditions may require the extradition court to seek further information or assurances from the requesting state before extradition can proceed.
The High Court’s Decision
Mrs Justice Foster accepted that some of the material concerning Polish prisons was troubling, including reports of violence, inappropriate restraint and other potentially degrading treatment. However, the court concluded that the evidence demonstrated individual incidents rather than systemic conditions sufficient to displace the strong presumption that Poland would comply with its Article 3 obligations.
The court therefore rejected the Article 3 arguments and refused the applications for authority to obtain further expert evidence. The remaining grounds advanced on behalf of Chromczuk and Szulejewski were also dismissed.
Significance of the Chromczuk Judgment
Chromczuk & Ors v Polish Judicial Authority [2026] EWHC 2276 (Admin) provides a recent High Court examination of Article 3 ECHR and prison conditions in Poland, including substantial post-Krampa material and the significance of a 2026 German court decision concerning extradition to Poland.
The judgment is particularly relevant to the evidential threshold required before concerns about prison conditions can displace the presumption of Article 3 compliance and require further information or assurances from a requesting state. The court ultimately concluded that the new material did not meet that threshold.
George Hepburne-Scott’s Representation
George Hepburne-Scott appeared as sole counsel for the first and second applicants, Lukasz Chromczuk and Krzysztof Szulejewski, instructed by Magdalena Motyl of Bark & Co Solicitors. The approved judgment records George as appearing on behalf of the first and second applicants and sets out in detail the submissions advanced concerning Article 3 ECHR, Polish prison conditions and the significance of the more recent evidence.
George is a specialist extradition barrister who regularly represents requested persons in proceedings at Westminster Magistrates’ Court and in extradition appeals before the High Court.
