Re an Application by New Zealand

New Zealand sought to review an order made by a magistrate to release Mr Bannister from custody. The magistrate had found that the lengthy delay since the alleged offences made extradition unjust, oppressive or too severe a punishment. New Zealand argued that surrender to New Zealand was not unjust, oppressive or too severe a punishment and sought to quash the magistrate's order. The key legal issue was whether the lengthy delay since the alleged offences made extradition unjust, oppressive or too severe a punishment. The Court found that the accused had not shown that he was prejudiced in his defence by the delay. While the delay was oppressive due to the hardship to the accused's family, this was outweighed by the gravity of the charges of rape and indecent assault on a child. The Court held that extradition to New Zealand was not too severe a punishment. The Court quashed the magistrate's order and directed that Mr Bannister be surrendered to New Zealand.

The final orders were that the magistrate's order releasing Mr Bannister from custody be quashed and that a magistrate order, by warrant, that William Tuhuru David Bannister be surrendered to New Zealand. The Court found that the lengthy delay since the alleged offences did not make extradition unjust, oppressive or too severe a punishment and that the accused should be surrendered to New Zealand to face the charges.