Stepp v Government of the United States of America & Anor

Stepp v Government of the United States of America & Anor

There was no credible evidence to support the appellant's claim of bad faith or fabrication by the US authorities; the District Judge's findings were justified. The existence of specialty arrangements between the UK and USA satisfies s.95 of the Extradition Act 2003, regardless of whether the appellant personally has standing to enforce the specialty rule in US courts. The Secretary of State was entitled to order extradition.

Parties
Appellant: Brian Stepp; First Respondent: The Government of the United States of America; Second Respondent: The Secretary of State for the Home Department
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Extradition Appeal / High Court Appeal From District Judge and Secretary of State Decisions
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Specialty Principle, Good Faith in Extradition, European Convention on Human Rights, Standing to Raise Specialty, Interpretation of Extradition Act 2003
Extradition Law Human Rights Law Criminal Law Abuse of Process Specialty Principle Good Faith in Extradition European Convention on Human Rights Standing to Raise Specialty +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 Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brian Stepp

Appellant

The Government of the United States of America

First Respondent

The Secretary of State for the Home Department

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Extradition Appeal / High Court Appeal From District Judge and Secretary of State Decisions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the extradition request was made in bad faith and in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights
  2. 2 Whether the District Judge erred in fact or law in rejecting the appellant's submissions
  3. 3 Whether the Secretary of State was prohibited from ordering extradition due to lack of effective specialty arrangements under s.95 Extradition Act 2003

Ratio Decidendi

There was no credible evidence to support the appellant's claim of bad faith or fabrication by the US authorities; the District Judge's findings were justified. The existence of specialty arrangements between the UK and USA satisfies s.95 of the Extradition Act 2003, regardless of whether the appellant personally has standing to enforce the specialty rule in US courts. The Secretary of State was entitled to order extradition.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Both appeals (against the District Judge and Secretary of State) are dismissed.