Republic Of Croatia and Snedden

The Republic of Croatia and Snedden concerned an application by the Republic of Croatia for a writ of habeas corpus to secure the release of Mr. Snedden, who was detained in Australia pursuant to a warrant issued under the Extradition Act 1901 (Cth). The Republic of Croatia sought Mr. Snedden's extradition to face criminal charges in that country. The High Court of Australia was required to determine whether the detention of Mr. Snedden was lawful.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the Republic of Croatia, as a successor state to the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, could rely on an extradition treaty concluded between Australia and the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1974. Specifically, the Court had to consider whether the Republic of Croatia had succeeded to the rights and obligations of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia under that treaty, and whether the treaty remained in force and applicable to the Republic of Croatia.

Gummow J reasoned that the continuity of treaties between a successor state and a third state is a matter of international law, which is applied by Australian courts. His Honour considered the principles of state succession and the effect of the dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The Court ultimately found that the Republic of Croatia had not established that it was entitled to rely on the 1974 extradition treaty. This was because the treaty had not been continued in force by agreement between Australia and the Republic of Croatia, nor had the Republic of Croatia otherwise demonstrated its succession to the treaty rights.

Consequently, the High Court ordered that the writ of habeas corpus be granted and that Mr. Snedden be discharged from custody.