... or did Abu Qatada's legal team lodge his appeal a day late?

Personally I'd back May on this one, but am intrigued how on earth the ECHR office was apparently open to receive anything at 11 pm? That's the unfeasible bit for me.

I'd imagine it was faxed over rather than being physically handed in.

I would imagine that as an appeal is currently awaiting adjudication at the ECHR, the UK will not be able to carry out the deportation.

Given the speed the ECHR moves, it could take another three months for them to determine that the appeal was out of time, if that is the case.

Isn't it possible to simply bung the court clerk?

If it moved to Malta, I would say it would become part of the 'procedure'

A lawyer on 5Live today was saying that the European court take it as 3 calendar months from the day AFTER the original hearing, which I understand was on the 16th January and so means he had up until 23:59 on the 17th April to lodge any appeal.
Which would seem to say that Theresa May is wrong.

If that's the case, then it's yet another example of the beautifully-shod Ms May being less than fully competent.

The SSHD and her team are always making mistakes on these kind of things, that's why we have courts to pick up on their mistakes in following law and procedure.

Be interesting if Abu Qatada has a case for wrongful arrest/detention, an ongoing civil matter would also put a bar on his removal

"And I kid you not, he avoided deportation because of his pet cat"

Wouldn't be the same Theresa May would it?

In answer to the thread title then: no.

Not only that, but neither can she even err on the side of caution and make sure everything was in order before sending the lads round.

Just watch the spin doctors at work ... and it'll all be ECHR's fault.

As [iThe Sun[/i editor used to say ... you couldn't make it up.
Except she did.