Riley, Robert Leslie v Evans, Clyde & Ors [1983] FCA 350

Riley, Robert Leslie v Evans, Clyde & Ors [1983] FCA 350

On judicial review of the magistrate's committal decisions, most of the challenged offences were found to be properly treated as extraditable under Australian law and the Treaty, and the magistrate did not err in admitting foreign evidence or applying the sufficiency test. However, in certain counts (for both Riley and Butler) there was insufficient evidence linking the accused or a failure to satisfy the extraditable crime or time limitation requirements, and the warrant should not be supported by those counts; but the majority of the committals were upheld. There was no error of law or breach of natural justice established in the conduct of proceedings or in relation to admissibility of...

Parties
Applicant: Robert Leslie Riley; Applicant: Wallace Edward Butler; First Respondent: Clyde Evans; Second Respondent: Kevin Webb; Third Respondent: Frank Mackenzie; Fourth Respondent: Eric Quarmby; Fourth Respondent; Fifth Respondent: Commonwealth of Australia
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 November 1983
Procedural Posture
Application for Judicial Review / Reasons for Judgment Following Hearing of Applications for Orders Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977
Outcome
Applications dismissed (orders for short minutes and relisting). Commital upheld on most counts but not upheld on specified counts.
Legal Topics
Review of Magistrate's Decision to Commit to Prison to Await Surrender, Meaning of Extraditable Crimes Under Extradition (foreign States) Act 1966 and Treaty on Extradition Between Australia and the United States of America, Admissibility and Sufficiency of Foreign Evidence, Application of Local Rules of Evidence, Natural Justice
Administrative Law Extradition Review of Magistrate's Decision to Commit to Prison to Await Surrender Meaning of Extraditable Crimes Under Extradition (foreign States) Act 1966 and Treaty on Extradition Between Australia and the United States of America Admissibility and Sufficiency of Foreign Evidence Application of Local Rules of Evidence Natural Justice

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 5 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Leslie Riley

Applicant

Wallace Edward Butler

Applicant

Clyde Evans

First Respondent

Kevin Webb

Second Respondent

Frank Mackenzie

Third Respondent

Eric Quarmby

Fourth Respondent

Commonwealth of Australia

Fourth Respondent; Fifth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Judicial Review / Reasons for Judgment Following Hearing of Applications for Orders Under the Administrative Decisions (judicial Review) Act 1977

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the offences alleged constitute extraditable crimes under Australian law and the Treaty
  2. 2 What evidence is admissible and sufficient to justify committal for trial under the relevant law
  3. 3 Whether the magistrate applied the correct test for sufficiency of the evidence

Ratio Decidendi

On judicial review of the magistrate's committal decisions, most of the challenged offences were found to be properly treated as extraditable under Australian law and the Treaty, and the magistrate did not err in admitting foreign evidence or applying the sufficiency test. However, in certain counts (for both Riley and Butler) there was insufficient evidence linking the accused or a failure to satisfy the extraditable crime or time limitation requirements, and the warrant should not be supported by those counts; but the majority of the committals were upheld. There was no error of law or breach of natural justice established in the conduct of proceedings or in relation to admissibility of...

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed (orders for short minutes and relisting). Commital upheld on most counts but not upheld on specified counts.

Orders

  • The Commonwealth respondent to file and serve short minutes of order within eight days.
  • The applicants to file and serve any variations to these short minutes within eight days of service.