Heywood -v- Attorney General [2008] IESC 60 (29 October 2008)

Heywood -v- Attorney General [2008] IESC 60 (29 October 2008)

Although there was an exceptional lapse of time and some exceptional circumstances (delays and two short periods of unlawful detention), a balanced analysis of the entire period and all circumstances, including the seriousness of the alleged offences, did not make it unjust, oppressive or invidious to extradite the applicant. The appeal was dismissed and the High Court order affirmed.

Citation
[2008] IESC 60
Parties
Applicant/appellant: Robert Lloyd Heywood; Respondent/respondent: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
29 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Extradition Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Order Refusing Release 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, Unlawful Detention, Family Life and Extradition
Criminal Law Extradition Law Extradition Delay in Prosecution Exceptional Circumstances Unlawful Detention Family Life and 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Lloyd Heywood

Applicant/appellant

Attorney General

Respondent/respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lapse of time and other exceptional circumstances make it unjust, oppressive or invidious to extradite the applicant under section 50(2)(bbb) of the Extradition Act 1965

Ratio Decidendi

Although there was an exceptional lapse of time and some exceptional circumstances (delays and two short periods of unlawful detention), a balanced analysis of the entire period and all circumstances, including the seriousness of the alleged offences, did not make it unjust, oppressive or invidious to extradite the applicant. The appeal was dismissed and the High Court order affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed

Orders

  • Application for release under section 50(2)(bbb) of the Extradition Act 1965 refused
  • Orders for extradition under section 47 of the Act remain effective and enforceable