Liem v Republic of Indonesia [2017] FCA 1303

Liem v Republic of Indonesia [2017] FCA 1303

It was open to the Minister to conclude that the applicant was an 'extraditable person' within the meaning of s 6 of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth); the extradition request material was sufficient to found the Minister's opinion that the applicant was 'accused of having committed' the offences; dual criminality was satisfied, as the alleged conduct would constitute offences under NSW and Commonwealth law; there was no denial of procedural fairness and no error by the Magistrate; judicial review and statutory appeal grounds were dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review and Statutory Appeal / Final Hearing, Orders, and Reasons for Judgment
Outcome
Amended originating application dismissed with costs; magistrate's orders confirmed.
Legal Topics
['judicial Review' 'extradition Eligibility' 'dual Criminality' 'conduct Statement Requirements']
['extradition' 'federal Crime'] ['judicial Review' 'extradition Eligibility' 'dual Criminality' 'conduct Statement Requirements']

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

Judicial Review and Statutory Appeal / Final Hearing, Orders, and Reasons for Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Minister's decision to issue notice under s 16 of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth) was valid" "Whether the applicant was 'accused of having committed the offences' as required under s 6 of the Extradition Act" "Whether Magistrate's order on eligibility for surrender was a nullity" 'Whether the conduct statement provided satisfied s 19(3)(c)(ii) of the Extradition Act' 'Whether the dual criminality requirement was established']

Ratio Decidendi

It was open to the Minister to conclude that the applicant was an 'extraditable person' within the meaning of s 6 of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth); the extradition request material was sufficient to found the Minister's opinion that the applicant was 'accused of having committed' the offences; dual criminality was satisfied, as the alleged conduct would constitute offences under NSW and Commonwealth law; there was no denial of procedural fairness and no error by the Magistrate; judicial review and statutory appeal grounds were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Amended originating application dismissed with costs; magistrate's orders confirmed.

Orders

  • ['The amended originating application be dismissed with costs.' 'Pursuant to s 21(2)(a) of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth), the orders made on 18 May 2017 by the third respondent, Magistrate Price, pursuant to s 19(9) of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth), be confirmed.']