The British Home Secretary, Theresa May, is bidding to prevent Aldhouse appealing against his extradition, Britain's 'Birmingham Mail' reports tonight.
It's a fresh twist in a notable Phuket murder case, a twist that one senior British judge has described as ''Kafkaesque in the extreme,'' although it could mean Aldhouse will be back on Phuket in months rather than years.
Aldhouse, a kickboxer who was training on Phuket, allegedly stabbed to death former US Marine Dashawn Longfellow in September last year in a vengeful ambush after the two had fought at the Freedom Bar in the beach district of Rawai at Aldhouse's instigation, a fight that Longfellow won.
In a precedent-setting case, Home Secretary Mrs May this year supported a court ruling that Aldhouse should be extradited to Thailand and Phuket to face the murder charge.
But the 27-year-old, a former Birmingham area bouncer, wants to appeal his extradition on the grounds that conditions in Thai jails would violate his human rights.
So keen are Thai officials to have Aldhouse back that there has even been talk of building a special cell to hold him, rather than have him win the case and avoid trial for murder.
Other expats imprisoned in admittedly-crowded Phuket Prison have few complaints, several inmates told Phuketwan just last week. A royal amnesty release in honor of HM The King's 84th birthday has seen inmate numbers reduced by about 10 percent.
In the latest court case, which only came to light tonight, Mrs May claims the Home Office was not correctly notified of his appeal against the Thai government's extradition request.
Clair Dobbin, for Mrs May, told London's High Court that Mr Aldhouse only sent a letter to the government department, rather than the full legal papers necessary for ''administrative efficiency''.
Joseph Middleton, for Mr Aldhouse, said the appeal was against the Thai Government, not the Home Office, and should go ahead, the Mail reported.
Senior judge Sir John Thomas said attempts to block the appeal were ''Kafkaesque in the extreme''.
''It has nothing to do with the dispute between the parties, it only concerns the administrative convenience of another party,'' he said.
Sir John, sitting with Mr Justice Ouseley, reserved judgement on whether the appeal should be heard.