Attorney General -v- Davis [2017] IECA 50 (28 February 2017)

Attorney General -v- Davis [2017] IECA 50 (28 February 2017)

The appeal was dismissed because it was not based on a point of law but on findings of fact by the trial judge, which are not open to review on appeal under s.29(5) of the Extradition Act 1965. Even if the court could review the facts, the evidence did not establish substantial grounds for believing that the appellant would face a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment or a disproportionate interference with his rights if extradited to the United States, given the medical care and procedures available in the U.S. prison system.

Citation
[2017] IECA 50
Parties
Respondent: Attorney General; Appellant: Gary Davis
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
28 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Extradition Appeal / Appeal From High Court Order for Surrender
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Article 3 ECHR, Article 8 ECHR, Asperger's Syndrome and Extradition, Mental Health and Prison Conditions, Proportionality in Extradition, Appeal on Point of Law, Extradition Act 1965
Extradition Law Human Rights Law Criminal Law Article 3 ECHR Article 8 ECHR Asperger's Syndrome and Extradition Mental Health and Prison Conditions Proportionality 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 3 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Respondent

Gary Davis

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Extradition Appeal / Appeal From High Court Order for Surrender

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether surrender of the appellant to the United States would expose him to a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment contrary to Article 3 ECHR and Article 40.3 of the Constitution due to his Asperger’s Syndrome and associated mental health conditions
  2. 2 Whether surrender would violate his rights under Article 8 ECHR and Article 40.3.2 of the Constitution to the integrity of the human mind and personality
  3. 3 Whether the appeal was permissible on the facts found by the trial judge or only on a point of law

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because it was not based on a point of law but on findings of fact by the trial judge, which are not open to review on appeal under s.29(5) of the Extradition Act 1965. Even if the court could review the facts, the evidence did not establish substantial grounds for believing that the appellant would face a real risk of inhuman or degrading treatment or a disproportionate interference with his rights if extradited to the United States, given the medical care and procedures available in the U.S. prison system.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The order for surrender of the appellant to the United States stands.