United States of America v. Hay

United States of America v. Hay

There was insufficient evidence that Canadian authorities possessed disclosureable material or that an 'air of reality' existed to justify ordering disclosure or a stay; identification met the balance of probabilities and the s.29 committal test was satisfied; issues of delay, alleged prior assurances and Charter fairness are matters for the Minister in deciding surrender, not for the extradition judge.

Citation
2004 BCSC 884
Parties
Requesting State: United States of America; Requested Person / Fugitive: Patrick Hay; Representative of Attorney General of Canada (on Behalf of Usa): Department of Justice (Canada)
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 July 2004
Procedural Posture
Extradition / Committal Hearing (decision on Committal, Disclosure and Stay Applications)
Outcome
Committal ordered to await surrender; disclosure application dismissed; stay of proceedings dismissed
Legal Topics
Disclosure, Abuse of Process, Delay, Charter S.7, Ministerial Discretion, Identification
Source Language
English
Extradition Criminal Procedure Constitutional Law Disclosure Abuse of Process Delay Charter S.7 Ministerial Discretion +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

United States of America

Requesting State

Patrick Hay

Requested Person / Fugitive

Department of Justice (Canada)

Representative of Attorney General of Canada (on Behalf of Usa)

Procedural Posture

Extradition / Committal Hearing (decision on Committal, Disclosure and Stay Applications)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether identification evidence establishes identity of the fugitive
  2. 2 Whether Canadian authorities hold disclosureable material concerning an alleged 1976 agreement or deportation order
  3. 3 Whether the 27 year delay and alleged prior assurances amount to abuse of process or a s.7 Charter breach

Ratio Decidendi

There was insufficient evidence that Canadian authorities possessed disclosureable material or that an 'air of reality' existed to justify ordering disclosure or a stay; identification met the balance of probabilities and the s.29 committal test was satisfied; issues of delay, alleged prior assurances and Charter fairness are matters for the Minister in deciding surrender, not for the extradition judge.

Court Disposition

Committal ordered to await surrender; disclosure application dismissed; stay of proceedings dismissed

Orders

  • Application to renew disclosure dismissed
  • Application for a stay of proceedings dismissed