Ronald Warren Woss v Johannes Jacobsen & anor [1984] FCA 343

Ronald Warren Woss v Johannes Jacobsen & anor [1984] FCA 343

The Justices Act (Qld) continues to be a 'law of a State' for the purposes of s. 18, even where it applies jointly as Commonwealth law due to s. 68(1) of the Judiciary Act. Thus, the Western Australian Magistrate had jurisdiction to endorse the Queensland-issued warrant. Where the Supreme Court of Western Australia has power to review the exercise of power on the merits under s. 19, and such review is pending, the Federal Court will, in its discretion, decline to entertain a duplicative application for review. The application is dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: Ronald Warren Woss; First Respondent: Johannes Jacobsen; Second Respondent: Anor.
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 October 1984
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Final Judgment With Orders
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Magistrates, Apprehension and Return of Accused Persons, Service and Execution of Process
Administrative Law Criminal Law Extradition Jurisdiction of Magistrates Apprehension and Return of Accused Persons Service and Execution of Process

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ronald Warren Woss

Applicant

Johannes Jacobsen

First Respondent

Anor.

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Application / Final Judgment With Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Western Australian Magistrate had jurisdiction to endorse and execute the Queensland warrant for apprehension under s. 18 of the Service and Execution of Process Act 1901
  2. 2 Whether the Magistrate's exercise of the power was improper and so unreasonable that no reasonable person could have so exercised it
  3. 3 Whether it would be unjust or oppressive to return the applicant to Queensland

Ratio Decidendi

The Justices Act (Qld) continues to be a 'law of a State' for the purposes of s. 18, even where it applies jointly as Commonwealth law due to s. 68(1) of the Judiciary Act. Thus, the Western Australian Magistrate had jurisdiction to endorse the Queensland-issued warrant. Where the Supreme Court of Western Australia has power to review the exercise of power on the merits under s. 19, and such review is pending, the Federal Court will, in its discretion, decline to entertain a duplicative application for review. The application is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application be dismissed.
  • The applicant pay the respondents' costs of the application.