+44 (0)20 7353 6000

International Advice & Assistance Services

International Advice & Assistance


"The firm is at the forefront of the market."

Chambers UK

Corker Binning has a long history of successful involvement in high-profile and complex extradition cases. We are ranked Band 1 for extradition in Chambers and Partners and Edward Grange is ranked as a star individual.

Our extradition lawyers have represented individuals whose extradition has been requested by a wide range of countries, including Russia, Ukraine, Hong Kong, Singapore, Thailand, the United States, Canada, South Africa, Gambia, Australia, New Zealand, Israel, India, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, most EU countries, and the UAE (including Dubai and Abu Dhabi). The offences alleged by these states have ranged from money laundering, fraud and corruption to other criminal matters such as murder, drug trafficking and robbery.

Our expertise

Our extradition lawyers have a deep practical knowledge of the defences available to contest extradition requests and the evidence required to support such challenges.  We have four lawyers ranked in Chambers and Partners in the field of extradition.

Edward Grange is co-founder and past Chair of the Defence Extradition Lawyers’ Forum (DELF) and co-author of the leading practitioners’ textbook on extradition law. Andrew Smith has acted for individuals in a string of complex and high-profile extradition cases and is ranked as a Band 1 lawyer whilst Danielle Reece-Greenhalgh is ranked as an ‘Up and coming’ partner. Peter Binning has a wealth of experience in extradition law and mutual legal assistance gained over 25 years, both as a prosecutor for the CPS and SFO and defending.

An essential part of an effective defence strategy to any extradition request is working with local lawyers in the requesting state who can provide invaluable information about their country’s criminal justice system, or the particular criminal proceedings which may support a defence to extradition in the UK’s courts. Just one of the advantages to instructing our extradition lawyers is our unrivalled contacts with local lawyers in other jurisdictions. Our extradition lawyers are in touch with a network of trusted criminal lawyers around the world who can advise on issues arising in the requesting state. Edward Grange is a member of Fair Trials’ Legal Experts Advisory Panel, an EU-wide network of experts in criminal justice and human rights.

Challenging extradition requests

Politically Motivated requests for extradition

We have developed an expertise in extradition cases arising from politically motivated prosecutions. Our London-based extradition lawyers have acted for numerous individuals whose extradition has been requested or threatened by Russia and other former Soviet states, including a number of prosecutions linked to the Yukos oil company and the Russian shipping industry. In these and many other cases, we have gathered expert evidence from human rights NGOs and academics, government officials, journalists and others who have personal experience of the particular criminal justice system in order to argue that the defendant is being punished on account of his political opinions.

Human Rights challenges

We have particular expertise in challenging extradition requests based upon the risks of human rights violations in the requesting state, including torture, arbitrary detention, or an unfair trial. Our lawyers have defeated extradition requests from a number of states, including The Gambia, the United States and Russia on human rights grounds. In Lodhi v Secretary of State for the Home Department, we successfully challenged the first extradition request made by the UAE by arguing that our client would suffer inhuman treatment if extradited to Dubai contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Arrest Warrant challenges concerning EU member states

Most extradition requests heard in the UK courts originate from EU countries that have issued an Arrest Warrant (AW). Our successful challenges have involved arguments relating to the offences not meeting the dual criminality test, the passage of time since the alleged offences have taken place resulting in a finding it would be unjust and oppressive to order extradition, and extradition being held to be a disproportionate interference with our client’s right to a family life.

Challenging INTERPOL Red Notices

Our expertise in extradition means that we are ideally placed to advise individuals in relation to INTERPOL red notices. We are able to advise clients on how best to anticipate and mitigate the risks of arrest and detention and, if they remain in the UK, on how best to secure their position in terms of being released on bail.

We have successfully had INTERPOL red notices deleted and obtained interim measures from INTERPOL blocking the processing of clients data whilst their case is considered by the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files. For more on our INTERPOL related work see our INTERPOL page.

We also advise individuals who seek advice on how to manage their reputation and ability to travel after they have defeated an extradition request.

Advising foreign governments

Our experience in extradition cases means that we have advised foreign governments seeking the extradition of individuals located in the UK. We have advised these governments on how their requests should be drafted and the likely course of the proceedings in the UK courts.

Advising individuals outside the UK

Our specialist experience also means that we have been instructed by individuals contesting extradition proceedings outside the UK, but who wish to rely upon our wider expertise in gathering evidence which will support a human rights or political defence to the proceedings.

Our extradition lawyers have advised:

  • Julian Assange in challenging the extradition request from the United States.
  • A British national sought by the Russian Federation in relation to an offence of money laundering said to have been committed as a result of bribery and corruption involving the shipping industry. The extradition request was discharged by the Senior District Judge on a number of grounds including political motivation.
  • A Russian national sought by the USA in relation to income tax offences. The request for extradition was withdrawn on settlement of the tax liability with a plea being entered remotely which meant the client never had to go to the United States.
  • A Russian national of a company in the natural resources sector who, with our assistance, successfully persuaded the Russian authorities to withdraw the extradition request issued for him.
  • A businessman sought by the US authorities on allegations including drug trafficking after a high-profile DEA “sting” operation in East Africa.
  • UK companies and their directors concerning the risk of extradition arising from overseas criminal proceedings, including prosecutions concerning tax fraud in Italy, embezzlement in a Central Asian country and bribery in a Gulf State.
  • A banker sought by the US authorities who became the first person to be convicted and sentenced in relation to a fraud which precipitated the 2008 financial crisis: we assisted in negotiating his plea bargain and his extradition on favourable terms.
  • Shrien Dewani concerning the extradition request issued by South Africa on allegations including murder and kidnap, and providing assistance during his criminal trial in Cape Town.
  • A Russian female who successfully resisted her extradition to Russia on the grounds that extradition would be a breach of her Article 3 rights because of inhumane and degrading prison conditions.
  • An Indian national in his successful appeal to the High Court to overturn the decision of the District Judge. This case related to the so-called Indian Naval War Room Leak.
  • A range of business people contesting Russian extradition requests in Cyprus, Italy and other EU states, working closely with local lawyers in these jurisdictions.
  • The former Prime Minister of Thailand, Thaksin Shinawatra.
  • Two UK nationals sought by Dubai and Abu Dhabi: extradition refused for both because the UAE had failed to demonstrate a prima facie case.