Norris v United States of America & Ors

Norris v United States of America & Ors

The conduct alleged against Mr Norris, if committed in England, would have constituted the common law offence of conspiracy to defraud and perverting the course of justice; the double criminality requirement is satisfied by the conduct-based test; delay does not render extradition unjust or oppressive; and extradition does not breach Articles 8 or 14 ECHR.

Parties
Appellant: Ian Norris; First Respondent: The Government of the United States of America; Second Respondent: The Secretary of State for the Home Department; Third Respondent: Bow Street Magistrates’ Court; First Intervening Party: Goldshield Group PLC; Second Intervening Party: Serious Fraud Office
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 January 2007
Procedural Posture
Extradition Appeal / Appeal From District Judge and Secretary of State's Extradition Order
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Double Criminality, Conspiracy to Defraud, Price Fixing, Obstruction of Justice, Delay in Extradition, Article 8 ECHR, Article 14 ECHR
Criminal Law Extradition Law Human Rights Law Double Criminality Conspiracy to Defraud Price Fixing Obstruction of Justice Delay in Extradition +2 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 7 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ian Norris

Appellant

The Government of the United States of America

First Respondent

The Secretary of State for the Home Department

Second Respondent

Bow Street Magistrates’ Court

Third Respondent

Goldshield Group PLC

First Intervening Party

Serious Fraud Office

Second Intervening Party

Procedural Posture

Extradition Appeal / Appeal From District Judge and Secretary of State's Extradition Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the alleged offences are extradition offences under section 137 of the Extradition Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether price-fixing conspiracy constituted conspiracy to defraud under English law at the material time
  3. 3 Whether the absence of dishonesty in the US offence precludes extradition (double criminality)

Ratio Decidendi

The conduct alleged against Mr Norris, if committed in England, would have constituted the common law offence of conspiracy to defraud and perverting the course of justice; the double criminality requirement is satisfied by the conduct-based test; delay does not render extradition unjust or oppressive; and extradition does not breach Articles 8 or 14 ECHR.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Both appeals by Mr Norris are dismissed.
  • Extradition to the United States is upheld.