The High Court has ordered Michael Breen’s surrender to the United Kingdom so he can be prosecuted for allegedly escaping from lawful custody in England. The order followed the court’s conclusion that he was not being sought to serve the remaining balance of a Jersey prison sentence.
The European arrest warrant was issued on 26 May 2006 and endorsed for execution in Ireland on 11 July 2006. Breen was arrested here on 18 July 2006. The warrant alleges that he left an open prison in Lincolnshire without authority, nine days after being transferred there from Jersey in August 2005 to continue serving a 10-year sentence imposed in 2002.
Breen objected that leaving an open prison should not count as escaping from lawful custody, and the court rejected that argument. It found that leaving an open prison without authority would amount to the corresponding common-law offence in Ireland. The court also found the offence met the minimum gravity requirement, noting that it carried a possible maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
A further objection concerned the possibility that, after surrender, UK authorities might return Breen to Jersey to serve the outstanding sentence. The warrant initially stated that Jersey intended to seek his transfer after any UK prosecution or sentence. The respondent argued that a UK procedure for backing Jersey warrants could bypass the requirement for Irish consent before onward extradition.
The applicant’s evidence included affidavits from a UK prosecutor and an English barrister. The prosecutor said the reference to a planned Jersey transfer had been inserted in error and that Breen would be detained in the UK to face prosecution and any resulting sentence for the escape offence. The barrister described the backing-of-warrants procedure but said Jersey authorities considered they could not request Breen’s return to serve the outstanding sentence. Jersey’s Attorney General then gave a written undertaking that Jersey would not request his return in respect of that sentence. Counsel for the applicant also confirmed that UK authorities would not reactivate its balance.
The judge held that the warrant’s original reference had rebutted the legal presumption that the issuing state did not intend onward extradition, but that the affidavits and assurances reinstated it. The court did not decide whether the Attorney General’s undertaking was admissible evidence, finding it unnecessary to do so. It also rejected an objection based on Breen being described as a Jersey prisoner, saying that this did not prevent UK authorities from prosecuting him for the alleged escape in England.
The court ordered surrender to the issuing state. The judgment decides the surrender application; it does not determine whether Breen committed the escape offence.