Carne -v- Assistant Garda Commissioner O'Toole [2005] IESC 22 (21 April 2005)

Carne -v- Assistant Garda Commissioner O'Toole [2005] IESC 22 (21 April 2005)

The appellant's medical condition did not amount to 'exceptional circumstances' on the evidence, and thus the requirements of section 50(2)(bbb) were not met; the appeal was dismissed without deciding whether the lapse of time was exceptional.

Citation
[2005] IESC 22
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Richard Anthony Carne; Defendant/respondent: Assistant Garda Commissioner Patrick O'Toole
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
21 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Extradition Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Order Refusing Relief Under Section 50(2)(bbb) of the Extradition Act, 1965
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed
Legal Topics
Extradition, Delay in Prosecution, Exceptional Circumstances, Medical Grounds for Resisting Extradition
Criminal Law Extradition Law Extradition Delay in Prosecution Exceptional Circumstances Medical Grounds for Resisting 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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Anthony Carne

Plaintiff/appellant

Assistant Garda Commissioner Patrick O'Toole

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Extradition Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Order Refusing Relief Under Section 50(2)(bbb) of the Extradition Act, 1965

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lapse of time since the alleged offences and/or the appellant's medical condition constitute 'exceptional circumstances' under section 50(2)(bbb) of the Extradition Act, 1965, justifying refusal of extradition

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's medical condition did not amount to 'exceptional circumstances' on the evidence, and thus the requirements of section 50(2)(bbb) were not met; the appeal was dismissed without deciding whether the lapse of time was exceptional.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed