New Zealand v Moloney [2006] FCA 1363

New Zealand v Moloney [2006] FCA 1363

The stay was refused because the respondents did not demonstrate exceptional or special circumstances warranting departure from the ordinary rule that New Zealand, as the successful litigant in the Full Court, was entitled to the benefit of that judgment. Their bail compliance, voluntary attendance, short requested stay, and poor health did not suffice, particularly where New Zealand confirmed they would not be removed before any timely special leave application was determined and the respondents could promptly seek bail from the High Court.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 October 2006
Procedural Posture
Extradition / Application by the Respondents to Stay Orders of the Full Court Pending an Application for Special Leave to Appeal to the High Court
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['stay of Orders' 'special Leave to Appeal' 'bail in Extradition Proceedings' 'surrender to New Zealand']
['extradition' 'federal Civil Procedure'] ['stay of Orders' 'special Leave to Appeal' 'bail in Extradition Proceedings' 'surrender to New Zealand']

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 / Application by the Respondents to Stay Orders of the Full Court Pending an Application for Special Leave to Appeal to the High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the orders of the Full Court confirming the respondents' surrender to New Zealand should be stayed for 10 days pending an application for special leave to appeal to the High Court." "Whether the respondents' prior compliance with bail, the short period of the stay sought, and their poor health constituted exceptional or special circumstances justifying a stay."]

Ratio Decidendi

The stay was refused because the respondents did not demonstrate exceptional or special circumstances warranting departure from the ordinary rule that New Zealand, as the successful litigant in the Full Court, was entitled to the benefit of that judgment. Their bail compliance, voluntary attendance, short requested stay, and poor health did not suffice, particularly where New Zealand confirmed they would not be removed before any timely special leave application was determined and the respondents could promptly seek bail from the High Court.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application to stay the orders of the Full Court in New Zealand v Moloney [2006] FCAFC 143 be dismissed.']