Anna Matelska
Principal Solicitor, Founder & Managing Director
Anna Matelska is the Principal Solicitor, Founder and Managing Director of AM International Solicitors, a boutique international law firm recognised for its expertise in complex criminal, civil and commercial litigation with a strong cross-border focus. Qualified in both England & Wales and Poland, Anna has built a distinguished practice advising individuals, businesses and multinational corporations on matters involving multiple jurisdictions.
With over two decades of legal experience, Anna represents clients in high-value and complex disputes where criminal, commercial and civil law intersect. Her practice encompasses white-collar crime, fraud, money laundering, Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA) proceedings, civil fraud, asset tracing and recovery, financial disputes, international divorce and cross-border asset division. She is frequently instructed by company directors, entrepreneurs and corporate entities facing regulatory investigations, VAT fraud allegations and financial crime proceedings.
Anna has earned a reputation for handling sophisticated litigation requiring strategic thinking, commercial awareness and decisive action. She regularly acts in cases involving substantial financial assets, urgent High Court applications, freezing orders and international enforcement proceedings. Her pragmatic approach enables clients to navigate legal challenges while protecting both their commercial interests and personal reputations.
A recognised authority in international trade and logistics law, Anna advises transport companies, freight operators, importers and exporters in relation to Border Force seizures, customs investigations and the recovery of detained goods. Her in-depth understanding of customs legislation and international supply chains enables businesses to respond swiftly and effectively to regulatory action.
In addition to her litigation practice, Anna provides strategic legal advice to businesses operating internationally. She advises clients from the United Kingdom, Europe, the United States, China and across Asia on mergers and acquisitions, corporate governance, international commercial contracts, regulatory compliance and complex cross-border transactions. She is experienced in drafting and negotiating sophisticated commercial agreements, ensuring that clients receive practical, commercially focused and legally robust advice.
Anna also has extensive experience in international family law, advising clients in high-net-worth divorce proceedings involving overseas assets, jurisdictional disputes and complex financial settlements. Her ability to manage sensitive matters across different legal systems makes her a trusted adviser to clients with international interests.
Known for her meticulous preparation, strong advocacy and commercially focused advice, Anna is respected by clients and professional peers alike for her integrity, leadership and commitment to achieving the best possible outcomes. She combines technical legal expertise with a practical understanding of business, allowing her to deliver strategic solutions tailored to each client’s objectives.
Beyond her legal practice, Anna is actively engaged with the wider legal community, collaborating with international law firms, NGOs and professional organisations. She is committed to mentoring junior lawyers and supporting legal education, reflecting her dedication to maintaining the highest standards within the profession.
Anna remains committed to delivering exceptional legal services to both English and Polish-speaking clients. Her ability to work seamlessly across jurisdictions, together with her extensive international experience, enables her to provide clear, strategic and effective legal advice in even the most complex matters.
With decades of experience, an international outlook and an unwavering commitment to excellence, Anna Matelska has established herself as a trusted adviser for clients facing significant legal challenges. Whether acting in criminal defence, commercial disputes, financial investigations or international family matters, she is recognised for delivering practical solutions, robust representation and outstanding client service.
Early Career and Legal Foundation
Anna Matelska’s legal career began in 1998 when she commenced her judicial training as an apprentice at a District Court in Poland. During the early stages of her career, she gained invaluable experience working alongside Polish government institutions and public authorities, contributing to legislative developments during Poland’s accession to the European Union. This experience provided a strong foundation in legislative drafting, regulatory compliance and the development of legal frameworks designed to protect businesses and private clients operating in an evolving legal environment.
Following the completion of her Master’s Degree in Law in Poland, Anna further enhanced her international legal education through advanced legal studies in the United States before obtaining a postgraduate diploma from a leading law school in London. She began her professional legal career in England in 2008, where she has since established an outstanding reputation in complex criminal, commercial and cross-border litigation.
Current Role
As the Principal Solicitor, Founder and Managing Director of AM International Solicitors, Anna leads a boutique international law firm advising individuals, businesses and multinational organisations across England & Wales, Poland and other international jurisdictions.
A qualified Solicitor-Advocate with rights of audience in the higher courts, Anna is also an experienced Duty Solicitor and accredited Crime Supervisor. Her practice encompasses complex criminal defence, financial crime, commercial litigation, international arbitration, civil fraud, asset recovery, corporate advisory work and cross-border family law matters.
She regularly collaborates with King’s Counsel, leading barristers, forensic accountants and international legal professionals on high-profile matters involving fraud, money laundering, serious organised crime, confiscation proceedings, corporate investigations and complex commercial disputes.
Anna is recognised by numerous diplomatic missions and international organisations and is included on the legal referral panels of several embassies in London and Warsaw, reflecting the confidence placed in her by both institutional and international clients.
As a dual-qualified lawyer, Anna is regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (England & Wales) and is a member of the Warsaw Bar Council (Okręgowa Rada Adwokacka), enabling her to provide strategic legal advice across multiple jurisdictions.
Professional Recognition
Throughout her career, Anna has earned a reputation for combining technical legal excellence with commercial insight and strategic thinking. She is frequently instructed in matters involving significant financial exposure, cross-border investigations and multi-jurisdictional disputes, where decisive action and innovative legal solutions are essential.
Her commitment to excellence, integrity and client service has established her as a trusted adviser to entrepreneurs, corporate executives, international investors and private clients facing complex legal challenges.
International Professional Influence
Anna’s professional influence extends well beyond her own practice. She maintains strong relationships with leading law firms, NGOs, financial professionals and legal institutions throughout the United Kingdom, Europe, the United States and Asia, allowing her to coordinate seamless cross-border legal strategies for clients operating internationally.
Committed to the continued development of the legal profession, Anna actively mentors junior lawyers, supports professional training initiatives and contributes to legal education programmes. By remaining closely engaged with developments in international law and business, she ensures that her clients receive forward-thinking, commercially focused and practical legal advice.
Through her leadership, international outlook and unwavering dedication to professional excellence, Anna Matelska continues to strengthen the reputation of AM International Solicitors as a trusted adviser in complex criminal, commercial and international legal matters.
Education, Training & Professional Credentials
- Anna Matelska has undertaken extensive legal education and professional training across Poland and England & Wales, combining academic excellence with practical experience in advocacy, litigation and international legal practice.
Professional Qualifications & Memberships
- Solicitor-Advocate with Higher Rights of Audience – Solicitors Regulation Authority (England & Wales)
- Duty Solicitor – Member of the Law Society’s Criminal Litigation Accreditation Scheme
- Solicitor Member – The Law Society of England and Wales
- Attorney-at-Law (Adwokat) – Member of the Warsaw Bar Council (Okręgowa Rada Adwokacka w Warszawie)
Legal Education & Training
- Legal Practice Course (LPC) – BPP Law School, London
- Postgraduate Diploma in Law – BPP Law School, London
- Master of Laws (LL.M.) – Nicolaus Copernicus University, Poland
- Master of Public Administration (MPA) – University of Szczecin, Poland
- Postgraduate Degree in Psychology and Resocialisation – Adam Mickiewicz University, Poland
Anna’s academic background, combined with her dual qualification in England & Wales and Poland, provides her with a unique perspective on both common law and civil law systems. Her specialist training in advocacy, criminal litigation and international legal practice supports her ability to advise and represent clients in complex, multi-jurisdictional matters.
Notable Cases
Anna Matelska has acted in a number of significant criminal, extradition and public law cases before the High Court, Court of Appeal and other senior courts. Her practice includes complex international litigation, serious criminal defence, extradition, judicial review and human rights cases involving cross-border legal issues.
Extradition
Lupsa v Timis Court, Romania
[2026] EWHC 1389 (Admin)
Represented the appellant in an appeal concerning when a person convicted in his absence has “deliberately absented himself” from trial following the Supreme Court’s decisions in Bertino and Merticariu, and in particular whether a formal warning that the trial may proceed in his absence is required. The High Court upheld the District Judge’s finding of deliberate absence on the evidence that he knew of the proceedings, and dismissed the appeal.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2026/1389
Mitroi v Bucharest Court, Romania
[2025] EWHC 3152 (Admin)
Represented the appellant, instructing leading counsel, in an appeal under section 14 of the Extradition Act 2003 and Article 8 following a six-year gap between the discharge of an earlier warrant and the issue of a replacement warrant under the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement. The High Court held that he remained a fugitive notwithstanding the discharge of the first warrant, found that the balance fell decisively in favour of extradition and dismissed the appeal.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2025/3152
Stefan v Urziceni District Court, Romania
[2025] EWHC 2236 (Admin)
Acted for the applicant on a renewed application for permission to appeal which raised the question whether the activation of a suspended sentence is a “trial resulting in the decision” for the purposes of section 20 of the Extradition Act 2003. The High Court held that section 20 is not engaged by non-attendance at a hearing concerned solely with the execution of a suspended sentence where the original conviction is final, and refused permission.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2025/2236
Dimin v Alba Iulia Court of Law, Romania
[2025] EWHC 768 (Admin)
Represented the appellant, who had been convicted in his absence, in an appeal applying the Supreme Court’s decisions in Bertino and Merticariu on trial in absence under section 20 of the Extradition Act 2003. The High Court indicated that he would not have been found to be entitled to a retrial for the purposes of section 20(5), but concluded that he had knowingly and intelligently relinquished his right to be present at his trial. The appeal, which also raised Article 8, was dismissed.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2025/768
Prawdzik v Regional Court of Bialystok, Poland
[2024] EWHC 3324 (Admin)
Represented the appellant, whose extradition was sought on a warrant covering both conviction and accusation matters. The High Court accepted that, where the requested person is a fugitive in respect of one set of matters but not the other, a separate Article 8 analysis should be carried out for each, and that the District Judge had erred in not doing so. Having carried out the balancing exercise afresh, the Court upheld the order for extradition.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2024/3324
Todirica v Pascani Court of Law, Romania
[2024] EWHC 3113 (Admin)
Represented the appellant, whose extradition was sought to serve 320 days’ imprisonment imposed when an unpaid fine for driving offences was converted into a custodial sentence. The appeal raised the question whether the hearing at which the fine was converted was a “trial” for the purposes of section 20 of the Extradition Act 2003. The High Court held that it was not, the conversion being essentially a mathematical exercise, and dismissed the appeal.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2024/3113
De Lehenstein Werndl v District Court in Krakow, Poland
[2024] EWHC 2771 (Admin)
Acted for the appellant, whose extradition was sought on two matters. Following a change in Polish law which reclassified the first matter as a non-extraditable misdemeanour, the High Court allowed the appeal on that matter, quashed the extradition order to that extent and discharged him on it. Permission to appeal on the second matter was refused.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2024/2771
Kopan v Regional Court in Czestochowa, Poland
[2024] EWHC 2229 (Admin)
Successfully represented the appellant, whose extradition was sought for vehicle-related fraud offences allegedly committed between 2004 and 2006. The High Court held that it would be oppressive to extradite him in light of the culpable delay of nearly 20 years on the part of the requesting authority, which had known since 2007 that he was living in the United Kingdom. The appeal was allowed under section 14 of the Extradition Act 2003 and the extradition order was quashed.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2024/2229
Banica v Pogoanele District Court, Romania
[2023] EWHC 405 (Admin)
Represented the appellant in an appeal which examined whether the proportionality provision in Article 597 of the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement requires stricter scrutiny of extradition requests than applied under the European Arrest Warrant scheme. The High Court held that Article 597 does not prescribe anything which the Article 8 balancing exercise would fail to deliver, and dismissed the appeal.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2023/405
Grecu v Gorj County Court, Romania
[2022] EWHC 2056 (Admin)
Represented the appellant in an appeal raising the question of the legal test to be applied where extradition is resisted under Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights (prohibition of slavery and forced labour), together with Article 8. The High Court considered the competing formulations of the Article 4 test, found that neither was satisfied on the facts and dismissed the appeal.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2022/2056
Prisacariu v Judecatoria Suceava, Romania
[2022] EWHC 538 (Admin)
Successfully represented the appellant, the mother of a young child, whose extradition was sought to serve a sentence of five years and two months. Although the argument that the issue of a second arrest warrant was an abuse of process was rejected, the High Court held, having regard to the likely effect of separation on her daughter, that extradition would be a disproportionate interference with Article 8 rights. The appeal was allowed and the appellant was discharged.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2022/538
Troka v Government of Albania
[2021] EWHC 3424 (Admin)
Acted for the applicant on an application to reopen a concluded extradition appeal on the basis of expert evidence that the limitation period for enforcing his sentence under Albanian law had expired. The High Court held that the courts’ reluctance to adjudicate on disputed questions of a requesting state’s limitation rules applies equally on an application to reopen, and that the strict criteria in Criminal Procedure Rule 50.27 were not met.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2021/3424
Magyar v Budapest Environs Court, Hungary
[2021] EWHC 2402 (Admin)
Represented the appellant in an Article 3 challenge to extradition based on prison conditions in Hungary, which had been stayed behind the test case of Zabolotnyi. Following the Supreme Court’s decision in that case, the High Court held that the assurance given by the Hungarian Ministry of Justice guaranteeing minimum personal space in detention could be relied upon, and dismissed the appeal. The start of the removal period was deferred so that a further argument concerning the rule of law in Hungary could, if appropriate, be pursued by an application to reopen.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2021/2402
Done v Petrosani Court of Law, Romania
[2020] EWHC 3192 (Admin)
Successfully represented the appellant, who was sought on a third European Arrest Warrant for offences dating from 2002 and 2005, two earlier warrants having been discharged. The High Court held that, although he was a fugitive, the age of the offences, the unexplained delay on the part of the requesting authority and the family life he had established in the United Kingdom since 2007 made extradition disproportionate under Article 8. The appeal was allowed.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2020/3192
Ogreanu v Italian Judicial Authority
[2020] EWHC 1254 (Admin)
Successfully represented the appellant, who had been convicted in Italy in his absence and without knowledge of the proceedings. The High Court considered whether gaps in a European Arrest Warrant concerning the right to a retrial can be filled by further information from sources other than the requesting judicial authority, and held that the material relied upon did not establish the required retrial rights to the criminal standard. The appeal was allowed under section 20 of the Extradition Act 2003.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2020/1254
Cosar v HMP Wandsworth and Others
[2020] EWHC 1142 (Admin)
Acted on a pro bono basis for two prisoners from Poland and Romania in a landmark High Court challenge concerning detention pending extradition during the COVID-19 pandemic. The case examined whether prolonged detention resulting from international travel restrictions was lawful under the Extradition Act 2003 and the European Convention on Human Rights. The proceedings addressed important constitutional principles concerning habeas corpus, judicial review and the legality of administrative detention during a public health emergency.
https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2020/1142.html&query=(Cosar)
Celczynski v Polish Judicial Authority (No. 1)
[2019] EWHC 3450 (Admin)
Acted for a requested person who, after the duty solicitor had left court, was asked whether he consented to extradition and agreed while unrepresented. The High Court held that consent can only validly be given by a person who is legally represented, as section 45 of the Extradition Act 2003 requires. Although the challenge to the validity of the warrant failed, the extradition order was quashed on judicial review and the case was remitted for a fresh hearing before a different District Judge.
https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/admin/2019/3450
Wójcik v Poland
High Court – CO/2181/2014
Successfully represented the appellant in extradition proceedings before the High Court. The appeal was allowed on the basis of an unjustified delay in issuing and executing the European Arrest Warrant, including failures by the National Crime Agency to identify that the appellant had been residing in the United Kingdom for several years.
Stopyra v District Court of Lublin, Poland
[2013] 1 All ER 18
Successfully represented the appellant in an important extradition appeal before the Divisional Court. The Court confirmed that delays in the grant of legal aid, where not attributable to the requested person or their legal representatives, could not prejudice an individual’s rights within extradition proceedings. The judgment remains an important authority on procedural fairness in extradition cases.
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2012/1787.html
Majchrzak v Public Prosecutor, Netherlands
CO/8383/2012
Represented the appellant in extradition proceedings concerning allegations of murder. It was consistently maintained that there was insufficient evidence to justify prosecution. Following extradition and approximately two years of detention in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, the Dutch courts released the client unconditionally after finding there was no evidence linking him to the alleged offence.
Crime
R v Dreszer
[2018] EWCA Crim 454
Represented the defendant throughout three trials at the Central Criminal Court (Old Bailey) in a high-profile prosecution involving allegations of kidnapping, false imprisonment and murder. Successfully argued before the Court of Appeal that the jury had been misdirected on the law of secondary liability following the Supreme Court’s decision in R v Jogee. The murder conviction was quashed, and the Court ordered a retrial with an alternative count of manslaughter.
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2018/454.html
R v Krezolek
[2013]
Represented the defendant in the widely publicised prosecution arising from the death of Daniel Pelka. The proceedings, heard before the Central Criminal Court, involved complex evidential issues and attracted extensive national and international media attention.
Immigration
Secretary of State for the Home Department v PF (Nigeria)
[2019] EWCA Civ 1139
Represented a Nigerian national in complex Court of Appeal proceedings concerning deportation and Articles 3 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The case involved significant issues relating to serious medical conditions, the deportation of foreign nationals and the proportionality of removal decisions under human rights law.
Areas of Expertise Demonstrated
These cases reflect Anna Matelska’s extensive experience in:
- International extradition and European Arrest Warrant proceedings
- Appeals before the High Court and Court of Appeal
- Serious crime and homicide defence
- Human rights and public law litigation
- Judicial review and habeas corpus applications
- Cross-border criminal defence
- International legal cooperation
- Complex appellate advocacy
Anna’s experience before the senior courts demonstrates her ability to manage high-profile, legally complex and multi-jurisdictional matters. She is recognised for delivering strategic, commercially focused and client-centred representation in cases involving significant legal, reputational and financial consequences.
