Timar v Republic of Hungary [1999] FCA 1518

Timar v Republic of Hungary [1999] FCA 1518

The supporting documents produced by the Republic of Hungary, considered together, met the requirements of s 19(2)(a) of the Extradition Act and Art 5 par 2 of the Treaty, and the magistrate did not err in adjourning to allow minor deficiencies to be remedied. Thus, the magistrate's order committing the applicant to prison to await surrender was lawfully made and should be confirmed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 November 1999
Procedural Posture
Application for Review of Magistrate's Order (extradition) / Judgment on Application for Review
Outcome
application dismissed; magistrate's order confirmed
Legal Topics
['eligibility for Surrender Under Extradition Act' 'requirements for Supporting Documents in Extradition' 'interpretation of Treaty on Extradition' "magistrate's Powers Under Extradition Act" 'adjournment to Remedy Documentary Deficiencies']
['extradition' 'criminal Law' 'administrative Law'] ['eligibility for Surrender Under Extradition Act' 'requirements for Supporting Documents in Extradition' 'interpretation of Treaty on Extradition' "magistrate's Powers Under Extradition Act" 'adjournment to Remedy Documentary Deficiencies']

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 of Magistrate's Order (extradition) / Judgment on Application for Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether supporting documents required by s 19(2)(a) of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth) were produced to the magistrate' 'Whether the documents complied with Art 5 par 2 of the Treaty on Extradition between Australia and Hungary' 'Whether the magistrate erred in law by granting the respondent an adjournment to correct deficiencies in the supporting document']

Ratio Decidendi

The supporting documents produced by the Republic of Hungary, considered together, met the requirements of s 19(2)(a) of the Extradition Act and Art 5 par 2 of the Treaty, and the magistrate did not err in adjourning to allow minor deficiencies to be remedied. Thus, the magistrate's order committing the applicant to prison to await surrender was lawfully made and should be confirmed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed; magistrate's order confirmed

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' 'The order of the magistrate made on 22 April 1999 committing the applicant to prison to await surrender under a surrender warrant be confirmed.' "The applicant pay the first respondent's costs of the application." 'The above orders shall not take effect until 12 November 1999 at...