Cabal v United Mexican States (No 2) [2000] FCA 295

Cabal v United Mexican States (No 2) [2000] FCA 295

An applicant is not precluded from making a further application for bail pending review under s 21(6)(f)(iv) of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth), but successive bail applications require special circumstances which did not exist or have arisen since the earlier application. Information or grounds available at the time of the first application cannot be relied on as new 'special circumstances' in subsequent applications.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 March 2000
Procedural Posture
Extradition Review Application / Preliminary Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence for Bail Application Pending Review
Legal Topics
['bail Applications' 'successive Bail Applications' 'statutory Interpretation' 'common Law Rights' 'extradition Act Requirements']
['criminal Law' 'extradition Law'] ['bail Applications' 'successive Bail Applications' 'statutory Interpretation' 'common Law Rights' 'extradition Act Requirements']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Extradition Review Application / Preliminary Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence for Bail Application Pending Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether s 21(6) of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth) precludes successive bail applications pending review' 'Whether fresh circumstances are required for successive bail applications under s 21(6)(f)(iv)' 'Whether material available during the first bail application can be relied upon in a further application']

Ratio Decidendi

An applicant is not precluded from making a further application for bail pending review under s 21(6)(f)(iv) of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth), but successive bail applications require special circumstances which did not exist or have arisen since the earlier application. Information or grounds available at the time of the first application cannot be relied on as new 'special circumstances' in subsequent applications.

Court Disposition

Orders

  • []