Balderrama v The Commissioner for Australian Federal Police [2001] FCA 577

Balderrama v The Commissioner for Australian Federal Police [2001] FCA 577

Given that the applicants are resident outside Australia, have no assets within the jurisdiction, and the balance of circumstances does not warrant an exception, security for costs should be ordered; allegations of fraud and bad faith do not themselves preclude an order for security where the issues can largely be resolved in the primary extradition proceeding, and the Attorney-General’s conduct in not providing documents does not bear on the present application.

Parties
First Applicant: Francesco Javier Rios Balderrama; Second Applicant: Eduardo Mandez Garcia Quiroz; First Respondent: The Commissioner for the Australian Federal Police; Second Respondent: United States of America; Third Respondent: Magistrate Leslie Brennan; Fifth Respondent: The Commonwealth Attorney General; Seventh Respondent: Commissioner for Corrective Services
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Security for Costs Application in Extradition Proceedings / Interlocutory (application for Security for Costs Before Joinder of Issue)
Outcome
Security for costs ordered against the applicants jointly in the sum of $10,000 for each of the first, second, and fifth respondents; matter stood over for further directions.
Legal Topics
Security for Costs, Extradition Process, Discretion Under Federal Court Rules
Practice and Procedure Extradition Security for Costs Extradition Process Discretion Under Federal Court Rules

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Francesco Javier Rios Balderrama

First Applicant

Eduardo Mandez Garcia Quiroz

Second Applicant

The Commissioner for the Australian Federal Police

First Respondent

United States of America

Second Respondent

Magistrate Leslie Brennan

Third Respondent

The Commonwealth Attorney General

Fifth Respondent

Commissioner for Corrective Services

Seventh Respondent

Procedural Posture

Security for Costs Application in Extradition Proceedings / Interlocutory (application for Security for Costs Before Joinder of Issue)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court should order security for costs against applicants in extradition proceedings who are resident outside Australia and have no assets within the jurisdiction
  2. 2 Whether allegations of fraud, bad faith, and the alleged defensive nature of the proceeding should lead the Court to decline to order security for costs

Ratio Decidendi

Given that the applicants are resident outside Australia, have no assets within the jurisdiction, and the balance of circumstances does not warrant an exception, security for costs should be ordered; allegations of fraud and bad faith do not themselves preclude an order for security where the issues can largely be resolved in the primary extradition proceeding, and the Attorney-General’s conduct in not providing documents does not bear on the present application.

Court Disposition

Security for costs ordered against the applicants jointly in the sum of $10,000 for each of the first, second, and fifth respondents; matter stood over for further directions.

Orders

  • Security be provided by the applicants jointly in the sum of $10,000 for each of the first, second and fifth respondents.
  • Such security is to be furnished within 21 days in a form satisfactory to the Registrar.