Local Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Romania v Livadariu [2020] NSWLC 8 Hearing dates: 8 May 2020 Decision date: 15 May 2020 Jurisdiction: Civil Before: Farnan LCM Decision: Bail refused
Catchwords: BAIL — Extradition — Overseas — from Australia — Special circumstances not shown for remand on bail
Legislation Cited: Extradition Act (Cth) 1988
Cases Cited: Vasiljkovic v Commonwealth of Australia & Ors (2006) 227 CLR 614
United Mexican States v Cabal and Others (2001) 209 CLR 163
Schoenmakers v DPP (1991) 30 FCR 70
Republic of Poland v Ginter [2009] FCA
Taylor v United States of America [2012] FCA 388
Holt v HoganNo 1 (1993) 44 FCR 572
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Sorin Vincent Livadariu (Applicant)
Romania (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
Self represented (Applicant)
T Buterin (Respondent)
Self represented (Applicant)
Attorney General’s Department, Canberra (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2019/00214187
Judgment
-
Mr Livadariu has applied to be remanded on bail pending proceedings in this court to determine his eligibility for surrender to Romania under the Extradition Act (Commonwealth) 1988.
-
Romania seeks to have Mr Livadariu extradited to serve a sentence of five years imprisonment imposed on him following his conviction in Romania for a robbery contrary to Article 211 of the Romanian Criminal Code, (of which four years and nine months allegedly remain to be served). The robbery involved the theft of a taxi on 12 February 1998 with violence.
-
The charge was dismissed at the Timis Tribunal on 18 May 1998. A prosecution appeal against that decision to the Romanian Court of Appeal was initially unsuccessful, with reasons for that decision given on 22 May 1998. He had been in custody it would appear between 13 February 1998 and 18 May 1998.
-
A further prosecution appeal was determined on 8 April 1999 and dismissed.
-
On the prosecutor’s final appeal, the Romanian Supreme Court of Justice convicted Mr Livadariu on 24 May 2000. A Prison Penalty Execution Mandate was issued on 29 June 2000 for five years prison, from which the period previously spent in custody of about three months was deducted.
-
Mr Livadariu’s own account is that by that date he had gone to Spain. There is no evidence of the circumstances in which that happened, however it appears he was legally represented in the proceedings in Romania.
-
The applicant first appeared before this court on 12 July 2019 on a warrant issued by a Magistrate of the Local Court of the Australian Capital Territory on 10 July 2019 under the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth). As at that date he was in custody in New South Wales serving a sentence. There is no evidence before me of the circumstances of that sentence, except that it is apparently a sentence of less than three years in total. He became eligible for release on automatic parole on that sentence on 5 May 2020. I have been informed that he has citizenship of both Australia and Romania.
-
No determination has yet been made as to whether he is…
Continue reading Romania v Livadariu
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Romania v Livadariu [2020] NSWLC 8
- Case
- [2020] NSWLC 8
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court examined Livadariu's history, including his previous extradition attempts and his flight risk. It found that Livadariu had evaded the Romanian authorities twice before and had a history of absconding, indicating a significant flight risk. Additionally, the court noted the seriousness of the charges against him in Romania, which involved organised crime activities, suggesting a high risk of reoffending if granted bail. Given these factors, the court concluded that Livadariu had not demonstrated the special circumstances necessary to justify bail. Consequently, the court refused Livadariu's application for bail.
Orders
Orders of the court
Bail refused
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.