Minister for Justice Equality and Law Reform -v- Puta [2008] IESC 29 (06 May 2008)

Minister for Justice Equality and Law Reform -v- Puta [2008] IESC 29 (06 May 2008)

The Oireachtas was not required to approve the exact text of the Framework Decision; approval of the exercise of the option or discretion sufficed. The differences between the draft and final Framework Decision were not significant enough to constitute a breach of Article 29.4.6. There was no clear disregard of constitutional obligations by the Oireachtas, and the Act of 2003 is not unconstitutional.

Citation
[2008] IESC 29
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Mohammed Iqbal; Plaintiff/applicant: Maros Sulej; Plaintiff/appellant: Tomas Puta; Defendant/respondent: Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform; Defendant/respondent: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
06 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
European Arrest Warrant, Parliamentary Approval, Separation of Powers, Constitutional Validity, Extradition
Constitutional Law EU Law Criminal Law European Arrest Warrant Parliamentary Approval Separation of Powers Constitutional Validity Extradition

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohammed Iqbal

Plaintiff/appellant

Maros Sulej

Plaintiff/applicant

Tomas Puta

Plaintiff/appellant

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform

Defendant/respondent

Attorney General

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 is unconstitutional due to lack of proper prior approval by both Houses of the Oireachtas as required by Article 29.4.6 of the Constitution
  2. 2 Whether the differences between the draft Framework Decision approved by the Oireachtas and the final adopted version invalidate the Act
  3. 3 What is the appropriate standard for judicial review of parliamentary procedures under Article 29.4.6

Ratio Decidendi

The Oireachtas was not required to approve the exact text of the Framework Decision; approval of the exercise of the option or discretion sufficed. The differences between the draft and final Framework Decision were not significant enough to constitute a breach of Article 29.4.6. There was no clear disregard of constitutional obligations by the Oireachtas, and the Act of 2003 is not unconstitutional.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed.