Minister for Justice Equality and Law Reform -v- Gheorghe & anor [2009] IESC 76 (18 November 2009)

Minister for Justice Equality and Law Reform -v- Gheorghe & anor [2009] IESC 76 (18 November 2009)

The appellants were aware or ought to have been aware of criminal investigations in Romania and left without official approval, amounting to 'flight' under section 10. Neither appellant was personally notified of the trial, but the Romanian judicial authority provided a sufficient written undertaking guaranteeing a retrial upon surrender, satisfying section 45. No legal basis exists to refuse surrender on family rights grounds under the Constitution or ECHR. The High Court order for surrender is affirmed.

Citation
[2009] IESC 76
Parties
Applicant/respondent: Minister for Justice Equality and Law Reform; Respondent/appellant: Florin Gheorghe; Respondent/appellant: Violeta Corina Gheorghe
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
18 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal (european Arrest Warrant / Extradition) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Order for Surrender
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court order for surrender affirmed.
Legal Topics
European Arrest Warrant, Extradition for Trial in Absentia, Right to Retrial, Family Rights Under Constitution and ECHR, Interpretation of 'fleeing' Under Extradition Law
Criminal Law Extradition Law European Law Human Rights European Arrest Warrant Extradition for Trial in Absentia Right to Retrial Family Rights Under Constitution and ECHR +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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Minister for Justice Equality and Law Reform

Applicant/respondent

Florin Gheorghe

Respondent/appellant

Violeta Corina Gheorghe

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (european Arrest Warrant / Extradition) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Order for Surrender

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants 'fled' Romania within the meaning of section 10 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether section 45 requirements regarding notification and retrial undertaking were satisfied
  3. 3 Whether surrender would contravene appellants' family and private life rights under Article 41 of the Constitution and Article 8 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants were aware or ought to have been aware of criminal investigations in Romania and left without official approval, amounting to 'flight' under section 10. Neither appellant was personally notified of the trial, but the Romanian judicial authority provided a sufficient written undertaking guaranteeing a retrial upon surrender, satisfying section 45. No legal basis exists to refuse surrender on family rights grounds under the Constitution or ECHR. The High Court order for surrender is affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court order for surrender affirmed.

Orders

  • Appellants to be surrendered to Romanian authorities pursuant to the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003.