New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

S 45 eligibility for surrender

Legal area

Court

16 Jul 2019

S v THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA [2019] NZHC 1635

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1635
Court

High Court

The High Court held s 7(e) did not apply because the sentencing Judge treated the Australian conduct only as background/grooming indicative of premeditation for distinct New Zealand offending and did not punish the appellant for the Australian offences; there was no evidential basis to conclude the New Zealand sentence included punishment for the Australian charges, so the District Court did not err in concluding the appellant remained eligible for surrender and s 8(1)(b) and s 48(4) were not engaged.
31 Oct 2017

TUKAKI v THE DISTRICT COURT AT TAURANGA & ANOR [2017] NZHC 843

Citation

[2017] NZHC 843
Court

High Court

Judge Ingram did not err in law; appellant failed to prove either limb of s 8(1)(c) because personal and cultural circumstances lacked the required nexus to the delay and were not extraordinary or compelling under s 48(4)(a)(ii); comity justifies a presumption of fair trial protections in Australia absent clear contrary evidence; referral to the Minister was not warranted; the High Court dismissed the appeal and judicial review and confirmed the surrender order.