Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Court has jurisdiction to set new surrender date for man who repeatedly frustrated European arrest warrant process
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Court of Appeal allows appeal of High Court ruling that it had no jurisdiction to set a third date for surrender for a respondent who frustrated the surrender process by refusing to board a plane to Lithuania twice, on the grounds that, in light of a preliminary reference from the Court of Justice of the European Union, there is nothing in the relevant legislation to prevent the case being brought back before a High Court judge if there is a new or repeated frustration of an attempt to give effect to an order for surrender.
European arrest warrant – statutory interpretation in respect of s. 16(5)(a) of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 – respondent frustrated the surrender process by refusing to board a plane to Lithuania twice – whether the High Court had jurisdiction to make the orders to set a further date for surrender – Article 23 of the Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 – preliminary reference to the ECJ – section 5 of the Interpretation Act 2005 – The European Arrest Warrant in Ireland by Remy Farrell, Senior Counsel, and Anthony Hanrahan, Barrister at Law (Clarus Press, Dublin, 2011) – there is nothing on the face of it in s.16(5A) to prevent the case being brought back before the High Court judge if there is a new or repeated frustration of an attempt to give effect to an order for surrender – appeal allowed.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
