Extradition – Inhuman and degrading conditions. The judge had not been wrong in his conclusion that the evidence which he had considered had not demonstrated a real risk that the appellant would be detained in a multi-occupancy cell where he would be afforded less than 3m square of personal space (excluding sanitary facilities). Accordingly, the Divisional Court dismissed the appellant's appeal against orders for his extradition to France to face trial for possession of an image of a minor with pornographic connotation and broadcast of an image of a minor with pornographic connotation using an electronic communications network.