Epstein Secrets

law of general public importance, and either the High Court or the Supreme Court concludes that the point is one that ought to be considered by the Supreme Court32. Where leave is granted, the Supreme Court may either grant the appeal, or dismiss it33. In practice, such appeals are extremely rare; in the past t

must be served within 65 days' Comment pi: bail is rarely granted prior to the requested person's production in court and never in cases where the Crown Prosecution Service objects to bail Arrest pursuant to a full extradition request The requested person must be brought before the extradition judge "as soon as pract

law of general public importance, and either the High Court or the Supreme Court concludes that the point is one that ought to be considered by the Supreme Court32. Where leave is granted, the Supreme Court may either grant the appeal, or dismiss it33. In practice, such appeals are extremely rare; in the past t

must be served within 65 days' Comment pi: bail is rarely granted prior to the requested person's production in court and never in cases where the Crown Prosecution Service objects to bail Arrest pursuant to a full extradition request The requested person must be brought before the extradition judge "as soon as pract

law of general public importance, and either the High Court or the Supreme Court concludes that the point is one that ought to be considered by the Supreme Court32. Where leave is granted, the Supreme Court may either grant the appeal, or dismiss it33. In practice, such appeals are extremely rare; in the past t

must be served within 65 days' Comment pi: bail is rarely granted prior to the requested person's production in court and never in cases where the Crown Prosecution Service objects to bail Arrest pursuant to a full extradition request The requested person must be brought before the extradition judge "as soon as pract

elevant principles see R v 1[2008] EWCA Crim 3062. See also XYZ v Revenue and Customs Comm [20101 EWHC 1645 (Ch). Agana( v HMRC[2011) STC 1000. and Crown Prosecution Service v G011;1120131 NM 276. The effect of this provision is to render inadmissible in evidence material obtained under s 7 in any criminal investigation

as not originally amended by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 so as to substitute Supreme Court for House of Lords. That was remedied in 20111 and the Supreme Court held in Start rd International Bank Ltd. (acting by its joint liquidaton) v Director of the Serious baud Dffice2 that appeals lie to the Supreme Cou