Vincent Thomas O'Donoghue v The Honourable Brendan O'Connor, Minister for Justice

VINCENT THOMAS O'DONOGHUE
v
THE HONOURABLE BRENDAN O'CONNOR, MINISTER FOR JUSTICE & ORS
[2013] HCASL 12
P11/2012

On 23 March 2011 the Minister for Justice ("the Minister") determined that the applicant be surrendered to Ireland[1]. The applicant sought review of that determination in the Federal Court of Australia (Gilmour J). On 29 August 2011 the application was dismissed.
[1]Extradition Act 1988 (Cth), s 22.
The applicant appealed to the Full Court of the Federal Court (Keane CJ, Rares and Besanko JJ). On 2 April 2012 his appeal was dismissed.
The applicant applies for special leave to appeal on the ground that the Full Court erred by failing to hold that the Minister was required to take into account international covenants concerning the rights of the child. He asserts that the material before the Minister did not include information about arrangements respecting his four children, who are residing in Australia with his ex-wife. The Minister did not give reasons for his decision. It would appear that the Minister had before him written representations made by the applicant together with 130 pages of supporting material[2]. There is no evidence that the Minister failed to take into account the interests of the applicant's children in making his decision.
[2]O'Donoghue v Honourable Brendan O'Connor [2012] FCAFC 47 at [28].
The applicant's grounds of review in the Federal Court did not raise an issue concerning the Convention on the Rights of the Child. It appears the matter was raised by senior counsel for the applicant at the hearing before Gilmour J. However, no application was made to amend the grounds to add a challenge based on the asserted failure to take into account the effect of the decision on the applicant's children.
The grounds of appeal in the Full Court did not raise any contention respecting the Convention on the Rights of the Child. In the course of an application to adjourn the appeal hearing counsel for the applicant submitted that there was an arguable ground that insufficient regard had been paid by the Minister to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. When pressed on this point counsel was unable to identify any arguable error[3].
[3]O'Donoghue v Honourable Brendan O'Connor [2012] FCAFC 47 at [45].
If special leave to appeal were granted the appeal would have no prospects of success.
The application is dismissed.
Pursuant to r 41.11.1 we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application with costs.

J.D. Heydon
26 February 2013 V.M. Bell

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Vincent Thomas O'Donoghue brought an application for special leave to appeal against the decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court which dismissed his appeal against the Minister for Justice's determination to surrender him to Ireland. The Federal Court had previously dismissed the applicant's application for review of the Minister's determination. The applicant's case was that the Minister had failed to take into account international covenants concerning the rights of the child in making his determination. The applicant's four children reside in Australia with his ex-wife, and he argued that the Minister did not have information about arrangements respecting his children before making his decision.

The legal issue before the court was whether the applicant's grounds for review and appeal sufficiently raised the issue of the Minister's failure to take into account the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The applicant's grounds of review in the Federal Court did not raise an issue concerning the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The matter was raised by senior counsel for the applicant at the hearing before Gilmour J. However, no application was made to amend the grounds to add a challenge based on the asserted failure to take into account the effect of the decision on the applicant's children. The grounds of appeal in the Full Court did not raise any contention respecting the Convention on the Rights of the Child. When pressed on this point, counsel for the applicant was unable to identify any arguable error.

The court held that the applicant's grounds for review and appeal did not sufficiently raise the issue of the Minister's failure to take into account the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The court noted that there was no evidence that the Minister failed to take into account the interests of the applicant's children in making his decision. The court also held that if special leave to appeal were granted the appeal would have no prospects of success. The application for special leave to appeal was dismissed.

Pursuant to r 41.11.1, the Registrar was directed to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application with costs.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established