Zabolotnyi v Mateszalka District Court, Hungary


Practice Areas


Cases Citation

UKSC 2019/0210

On 23 February 2021 the Supreme Court will consider the first ever extradition appeal concerning prison conditions in a requesting state. It will deal with the viability of assurances which purport to guarantee compliance with Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It concerns the following question of public importance:

“Where a Court is obliged to assess an assurance given to the United Kingdom relevant to extradition, is it is correct that the Court should exercise very considerable caution before admitting evidence which does not relate to an alleged previous breach of an assurance to the United Kingdom, but rather to an alleged breach of assurance to another EU member state? If yes, is it a correct approach that the Court should satisfy itself that such evidence is manifestly credible, directly relevant to the issue to be decided and of real importance for the decision in question?”.

On 1 September 2017 a Ukrainian individual’s extradition was ordered by a District Judge at Westminster Magistrates’ Court. He is accused of attending a government office in Hungary on 15 April 2015 and, conspiring with a public official, submitting a fraudulent application for a passport under a different name.

Among several bars to extradition which were raised it was submitted that there was a real risk that his extradition to Hungary would result in a breach of his right to protection from inhuman or degrading treatment contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

In recent years there have been a number of extradition cases where the courts have been required to consider allegations of breaches of Article 3. The most common issue raised concerned overcrowding. In its landmark ruling of Muršić v Croatia (2017) 65 EHHR 1 the Grand Chamber of the Strasbourg Court ruled that a prisoner must be accorded personal space of at least 3 m2 and it had become the practice for several countries to issue assurances to the domestic court which guaranteed compliance with Article 3.

After the hearing before the Magistrates’ Court and before the appeal was heard the Hungarian Ministry of Justice gave assurances that the Appellant would be held in satisfactory prison conditions and he would be guaranteed at least a personal space of 3 m2

On 16 April 2019 judgment was given by a three-judge Divisional Court (Irwin LJ, Simler J and Sir Kenneth Parker). The Court held that some categories of evidence were inadmissible for the purpose of testing assurances.

The Appellant sought to rely on evidence from various individuals who had been extradited to Hungary from both the UK and Germany. They had complained that they had been subject to assurances which had not been honoured. The Hungarian Ministry of Justice refused to give information about the individuals extradited from Germany because it was said that Hungarian domestic law prevented it from providing information to the UK. A distinction was drawn between assurances given to the UK and breached and those given to other Member States.

Related Barristers

Benjamin Seifert

Benjamin Seifert
Year of Call: 2007

Close X

Coronavirus Update

TGC continues proactively to safeguard against the risks posed by the spread of Coronavirus. We have a Covid-19 Committee who continue to monitor the situation and follow advice issued by the Government and Public Health England. We will be updating this page as and when new information becomes available. As of 6 July 2020, our London premises, 1 Harcourt Buildings, will be operating with a reduced clerking team in attendance. The remaining staff members and barristers will continue working remotely. We wish to reassure everyone that our contingency plans enable us to continue to provide our services.

Telephoning us

When calling our switchboard number, it will be diverted to a member of the clerking team who will be able to assist in the usual way. All direct dials in Chambers are diverted to be answered remotely.

Emailing us & Sending Instructions

Please send all instructions via email directly to We would be grateful if this could be sent in an orderly fashion to enable working from a screen manageable. We are able to receive hard copy instructions via DX or Post, if necessary. However, we have a preference for electronic documents wherever possible.

Please continue to communicate with barristers directly via phone or email.

Conferences, Joint Settlement Meetings & Mediations

Conferences, meetings and mediations will take place remotely, either by telephone or video until further notice. Group Telephone calls and video calls can be easily arranged. If an in-person meeting is felt necessary please see our Covid-19 Information page for full criteria.

Court Hearings

We are following the Government’s advice closely, which is changing daily. In keeping with that advice, we will continue to service hearings remotely, where possible and as instructed by the hosting Court. In-Person hearings will be accommodated by members of TGC. We will continue to monitor this situation.

Making a payment

If you do not already pay us by BACS, going forward please make arrangements to do so. Please contact the clerks who can supply you with the relevant BACS details.

If you wish to discuss our policy and procedure relating to coronavirus, please do not hesitate to contact our senior clerk Dean Norton on 07535 753098 or

To learn more visit our Covid-19 Information page.