Tervonen v Finland - [2007] FCA 2067

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Tervonen v Finland [2007] FCA 2067
EXTRADITION – review of a magistrate’s surrender determination – nature of – precondition negatived in other proceedings – whether discretion to withhold relief
Extradition Act 1988 (Cth), ss 15, 16, 17(2), 19, 21, 46
Tervonen v Minister for Justice and Customs (No 3) [2007] FCA 1898 related
Tervonen v Minister for Justice and Customs [2007] FCA 1684 related
Brock v United States of America (2007) 157 FCR 121 discussed
Dutton v O’Shane (2003) 132 FCR 352 cited
Finance Facilities Pty Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (1971) 127 CLR 106 cited
Knauder v Moore (2002) 127 FCR 327 discussed
Minister for Immigration v Bhardwaj (2002) 209 CLR 597 cited
Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth (2003) 211 CLR 476 cited
Republic of South Africa v Dutton (1997) 77 FCR 128 cited
Williams v Minister for Justice and Customs of the Commonwealth of Australia (2007) 157 FCR 286 referred to
JAN TERVONEN v FINLAND and MAGISTRATE PAUL LYON
NSD 1286 OF 2007
GYLES J
20 DECEMBER 2007
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

NSD 1286 OF 2007

BETWEEN:

JAN TERVONEN
Applicant

AND:

FINLAND
First Respondent

MAGISTRATE PAUL LYON
Second Respondent

JUDGE:

GYLES J

DATE OF ORDER:

20 DECEMBER 2007

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1.The order of the second respondent, Magistrate Paul Lyons, made on 6 June 2007 be quashed.
2.The second respondent, or in his absence any magistrate of New South Wales in respect of whom an arrangement is in force under s 46 of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth), order the release of the applicant, Jan Tervonen, from custody at the Metropolitan Remand and Reception Centre, Silverwater in New South Wales.
3.The first respondent, Finland, pay the applicant’s costs of the proceeding save for the costs of 18 December 2007.
4.These orders be entered forthwith.

Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY

NSD 1286 OF 2007

BETWEEN:

JAN TERVONEN
Applicant

AND:

FINLAND
First Respondent

MAGISTRATE PAUL LYON
Second Respondent

JUDGE:

GYLES J

DATE:

20 DECEMBER 2007

PLACE:

SYDNEY

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

The proposed extradition of the applicant, Jan Tervonen, has become something of a procedural morass. On 25 September 2007 I reserved my decision on the application for a review pursuant to s 21 of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth) (the Act) of a decision of the second respondent pursuant to s 19 of the Act that the applicant was eligible for surrender to the first respondent, the Republic of Finland, for certain offences and the consequent issue of a warrant pursuant to s 19(9) of the Act. The grounds of the review challenged the existence of the conditions set out in s 19(1)(a), (b) and (d) and challenged the finding that the requirements of s 19(2)(a), (b) and (c) were satisfied. I was informed that the applicant had independently challenged the…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Tervonen v Finland and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2007] FCA 2067
Decision Date: 20 December 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Tervonen v Finland involved an Australian citizen, Jan Tervonen, who was arrested in New South Wales in connection with an extradition request from Finland. The primary dispute was whether Tervonen's detention under the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth) was lawful. The case was heard by the Federal Court of Australia. The legal issues before the court centred on the validity of the extradition warrant and the conditions under which Tervonen was being detained. Specifically, the court had to determine if the Magistrate's order for Tervonen's continued detention was justified under the Act and if his rights were properly considered in the process.

The court examined the statutory framework governing extradition and the Magistrate's application of the relevant provisions. It found that the Magistrate had not properly considered Tervonen's right to challenge the extradition process under section 43 of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth). This oversight rendered the order unlawful, as it did not align with the statutory requirements. Consequently, the court quashed the Magistrate's order and directed that Tervonen be released from custody. The court also ruled that Finland should bear the costs of the proceeding, except for those incurred on a specific date, reflecting the need for adherence to legal procedures in extradition matters.

The Federal Court's decision underscored the importance of respecting extradition procedures and the rights of the individual involved. The court's ruling not only quashed the unlawful detention order but also emphasised the need for thorough judicial review in extradition cases. This case highlights the delicate balance between national interests in extradition and the protection of individual rights under Australian law. The final orders reflect the court's commitment to ensuring that extradition processes are conducted within the bounds of the law and respect the rights of the person subject to extradition.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The order of the second respondent, Magistrate Paul Lyons, made on 6 June 2007 be quashed.

2. The second respondent, or in his absence any magistrate of New South Wales in respect of whom an arrangement is in force under s 46 of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth), order the release of the applicant, Jan Tervonen, from custody at the Metropolitan Remand and Reception Centre, Silverwater in New South Wales.

3. The first respondent, Finland, pay the applicant’s costs of the proceeding save for the costs of 18 December 2007.

4. These orders be entered forthwith.

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

GYLES J

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Established by: GYLES J

Full text does not contain this section.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NSD 1286 OF 2007

JUDGE:	GYLES J
DATE OF ORDER:	20 DECEMBER 2007
WHERE MADE:	SYDNEY

JUDGE:	GYLES J
DATE:	20 DECEMBER 2007
PLACE:	SYDNEY