Johnson v Williams (Attorney-General) [1999] FCA 586

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Johnson v Williams (Attorney-General) [1999] FCA 586 EXTRADITION – application by accused person to Attorney-General to withdraw request for extradition – alleged failure on the part of the Attorney-General to assess that the applicant would obtain a stay of prosecution on the authority of Dietrich v The Queen [1992] 177 CLR 292 – alleged failure on the part of the Attorney-General to have regard to the fact that the applicant's co-accused had obtained a stay on Dietrich principles and the stated intention of the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions to prosecute all accused jointly -–fragmentation of the criminal process – fragmentation of the extradition process.

Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Extradition Act 1988 (Cth) Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) Extradition Act 1989 (UK)

Johnson v Holmes (unreported: Wilcox, Tamberlin and Merkel JJ; judgment delivered 18 November 1998) cited Attorney-General v Foster (1999) 161 ALR 233 referred to Dietrich v The Queen [1992] 177 CLR 292 cited R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Johnson (1998) 4 All ER 635 applied Bass v Permanent Trustee Co Ltd (unreported: Judgment delivered 24 March 1999) applied Beach Petroleum NL v Johnson (1993) 114 ALR 411 cited The Queen v Toohey: Ex parte Northern Land Council (1980-1981) 151 CLR 170 cited Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v Peko-Wallsend Ltd (1985-1986) 162 CLR 24 followed Friends of Hinchinbrook Society Inc v Minister for the Environment (1997) 147ALR 608 cited Associated Provincial Picture Houses v Wednesbury Corp [1948] 1 KB 223 referred to Prasad v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs(1985) 65 ALR 549 noted Hunter Valley Developments Pty Ltd v Kohen (1984) 3 FCR 344 applied Newby v Moodie (1988) 83 ALR 523 followed Yates v Wilson (1989) 168 CLR 338 followed Harris v Attorney-General (1994) 52 FCR 386 applied