Fedorowicz v Lithuania: Extradition, Dual Criminality and the Serious Crime Act 2015
George Hepburne-Scott represented the appellant in Fedorowicz v Prosecutor General's Office (Lithuania) [2022] EWHC 3088 (Admin), a successful High Court extradition appeal concerning dual criminality and the territorial scope of the offence of participating in the criminal activities of an organised crime group under section 45 of the Serious Crime Act 2015.
The Fedorowicz Extradition Appeal
Bartosz Fedorowicz was sought by the Lithuanian authorities under a European Arrest Warrant in connection with allegations concerning participation in the criminal activities of an organised crime group.
The appeal raised an important question about dual criminality: whether the conduct alleged against Mr Fedorowicz would constitute an offence under the law of England and Wales if it had occurred here.
The case focused in particular on section 45 of the Serious Crime Act 2015, which creates the offence of participating in the criminal activities of an organised crime group, and the territorial requirements applying to that offence.
Dual Criminality and Section 45 of the Serious Crime Act 2015
The central issue was whether the requirements of dual criminality under the Extradition Act 2003 were satisfied where the conduct attributed to Mr Fedorowicz had taken place outside England and Wales.
The High Court considered the territorial provisions governing the section 45 offence and whether it was sufficient that other members of the alleged organised crime group had carried out activities in England and Wales, even though the conduct alleged against Mr Fedorowicz himself was extraterritorial.
The Court concluded that the necessary territorial connection was not established in relation to Mr Fedorowicz's own participation. As a result, the conduct did not satisfy the requirements of dual criminality.
The High Court Allows the Extradition Appeal
The High Court allowed the appeal. Fordham J held that the requirements of dual criminality were not satisfied and Mr Fedorowicz was discharged.
The decision clarified the territorial scope of section 45 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 in the extradition context. In particular, participation by other members of an organised crime group in activities within England and Wales could not, without the necessary territorial connection to the requested person's own participation, establish liability under section 45.
The judgment therefore has significance beyond the individual case, particularly where an extradition request relies upon alleged participation in organised criminal activity occurring wholly or substantially outside the United Kingdom.
Legal Significance of Fedorowicz
Following the judgment, George Hepburne-Scott and Giovanna Fiorentino analysed the decision for New Law Journal, explaining its significance for the territorial scope of the offence under section 45 of the Serious Crime Act 2015.
The decision provides an important authority in extradition cases where dual criminality depends upon an offence containing specific territorial requirements. It demonstrates that the court must examine not simply the activities of an alleged criminal group generally, but whether the conduct attributed to the requested person satisfies the territorial requirements of the relevant domestic offence.
The principles considered in Fedorowicz may therefore be relevant to other extradition cases involving alleged participation in organised criminal activity outside the United Kingdom.
Representation
George Hepburne-Scott represented Mr Fedorowicz in the High Court appeal, instructed by Lansbury Worthington Solicitors.
The case forms part of his wider practice representing requested persons in extradition appeals before the High Court, including cases involving dual criminality, human rights, prison conditions, diplomatic assurances and the interpretation of the Extradition Act 2003.
