Dutton v O'Shane [2002] NSWSC 1086

Dutton v O'Shane [2002] NSWSC 1086

The plaintiff is eligible for surrender because all requirements for extradition under the Extradition Act are satisfied: the supporting documents and the warrant are duly authenticated; the conduct alleged, if committed in Australia, would constitute extradition offences under both Commonwealth and NSW law, including offences of fraud and false statements regarding foreign exchange; and there are no substantial grounds for believing any extradition objection under s 7(a), (b), or (c) exists. The offences are not political, nor is there probative evidence linking prosecution or extradition request to plaintiff's political opinions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 November 2002
Procedural Posture
Application for Review Under S 21 of the Extradition Act 1988 (cth) / Supreme Court Review of Magistrate's Eligibility for Surrender Order
Outcome
Plaintiff eligible for surrender
Legal Topics
['extradition Eligibility' 'dual Criminality' 'extradition Objections' 'supporting Documents' 'foreign Exchange Offences' 'fraud']
['criminal Law' 'extradition'] ['extradition Eligibility' 'dual Criminality' 'extradition Objections' 'supporting Documents' 'foreign Exchange Offences' 'fraud']

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

Application for Review Under S 21 of the Extradition Act 1988 (cth) / Supreme Court Review of Magistrate's Eligibility for Surrender Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Were the supporting documents and warrant duly authenticated as required by s 19(2)(a) of the Extradition Act?' 'Was the requirement of dual criminality under s 19(2)(c) satisfied?' 'Were there substantial grounds for believing there were extradition objections under s 7(a), (b), or (c)?' 'Would the conduct alleged have constituted an Australian extradition offence?' "Were the offences 'political offences' in relation to South Africa?"]

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff is eligible for surrender because all requirements for extradition under the Extradition Act are satisfied: the supporting documents and the warrant are duly authenticated; the conduct alleged, if committed in Australia, would constitute extradition offences under both Commonwealth and NSW law, including offences of fraud and false statements regarding foreign exchange; and there are no substantial grounds for believing any extradition objection under s 7(a), (b), or (c) exists. The offences are not political, nor is there probative evidence linking prosecution or extradition request to plaintiff's political opinions.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff eligible for surrender

Orders

  • ['Determination that Edward Isaac Dutton is eligible for surrender in relation to all fourteen offences charged in the indictment annexed to the affidavit of Andries Petrus de Vries sworn 29 December 1997']