King, R (on the application of) v Government of Australia & Anor [2010] EWHC 83 (Admin) (12 January 2010)

King, R (on the application of) v Government of Australia & Anor [2010] EWHC 83 (Admin) (12 January 2010)

Given the seriousness of the offences, the applicant's prior history of absconding, the strength of the evidence, and the significant flight risk, the tipping point justifying release on bail has not yet been reached despite the delay. Bail is refused, but liberty to renew is granted if there is no decision from the European Court within six months.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 83 (Admin)
Parties
Applicant: Anthony King; First Respondent: Government of Australia; Second Respondent: Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Bail Application in Extradition Proceedings / Application for Bail Pending Extradition and European Court of Human Rights Proceedings
Outcome
Bail refused; liberty to renew application if no European Court decision within six months.
Legal Topics
Bail, Extradition, Flight Risk, European Convention on Human Rights, Delay in Proceedings
Criminal Law Extradition Law Human Rights Law Bail Extradition Flight Risk European Convention on Human Rights Delay in Proceedings

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

Parties

Anthony King

Applicant

Government of Australia

First Respondent

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Bail Application in Extradition Proceedings / Application for Bail Pending Extradition and European Court of Human Rights Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether bail should be granted to the applicant pending extradition to Australia
  2. 2 Whether the delay in proceedings and ongoing European Court of Human Rights application justifies release on bail
  3. 3 Whether the applicant poses a significant flight risk

Ratio Decidendi

Given the seriousness of the offences, the applicant's prior history of absconding, the strength of the evidence, and the significant flight risk, the tipping point justifying release on bail has not yet been reached despite the delay. Bail is refused, but liberty to renew is granted if there is no decision from the European Court within six months.

Court Disposition

Bail refused; liberty to renew application if no European Court decision within six months.

Orders

  • Bail application refused.
  • Liberty to renew bail application if no decision from the European Court of Human Rights within six months from the date of this order.