Vasiljkovic v Commonwealth of Australia & Ors

[2006] HCATrans 314

[2006] HCATrans 314

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Registry  No C3 of 2006

B e t w e e n -

DRAGAN VASILJKOVIC

Plaintiff

and

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

First Defendant

MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CUSTOMS

Second Defendant

THE GOVERNOR, PARKLEA CORRECTION CENTRE, SENTRY DRIVE, PARKLEA, NEW SOUTH WALES

Third Defendant

MAGISTRATE MOORE, CENTRAL LOCAL COURT, LIVERPOOL STREET, SYDNEY

Fourth Defendant

Pronouncement of orders

GUMMOW ACJ
KIRBY J
HAYNE J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON THURSDAY, 15 JUNE 2006, AT 10.07 AM

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

__________________

GUMMOW ACJ:   This matter was heard in Canberra on 13 April 2006 by a Bench constituted by the Chief Justice, Justices Kirby, Hayne, Heydon and myself.  The Court now announces what, by majority, are its answers to the questions stated by the parties in the special case.  The Court’s reasons will be published at a later date. 

The order of the Court is:

1.        The questions stated by the parties in the special case for the opinion of the Full Court are answered as follows:

(a)Question: Is Part 2 of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth) invalid to the extent, if any, to which it purports to confer a power to deprive an Australian citizen of liberty otherwise than in the exercise of the judicial power of the Commonwealth? Answer: No.

(b)Question: Is Part 2 of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth), read together with the Extradition (Croatia) Regulations 2004 (Cth), invalid to the extent to which it purports to confer a power to deprive an Australian citizen of liberty otherwise than upon a finding that there exists a prima facie case against that person of the commission of the offences alleged by the State requesting extradition? Answer: No.

(c)Is regulation 4 of the Extradition (Croatia) Regulations 2004 (Cth) invalid because it was not made pursuant to the power conferred by section 51(xxix) of the Constitution or any other legislative power of the Commonwealth? Answer: No.

2.        The costs of the special case be costs in the action. 

I publish that order.

AT 10.09 AM THE MATTER WAS CONCLUDED