Heslehurst v Government of New Zealand [2000] FCA 1311

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Heslehurst v Government of New Zealand [2000] FCA 1311

extradition – extradition from Australia to New Zealand – warrants – whether warrant purported to be issued by a judge of New Zealand – whether magistrate indorsing warrant able to take an affidavit and inform himself from its contents – whether extradition unjust, oppressive or too severe a punishment JURISDICTION – application under s 39B Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) – ability of Court to make declarations as to proper construction of Extradition Act 1988 (Cth) PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – review under s 35 Extradition Act 1988 (Cth) – whether review constitutes a rehearing de novo – whether magistrate at first instance properly joined as a party to the review

Extradition Act 1988 (Cth) ss 28, 34, 35 Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 39B Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) ss 144, 145 Kenneally v New Zealand (1999) 166 ALR 625, discussed New Zealand v Venkataya (1995) 57 FCR 151, considered Bertran v Vanstone (FC) [1999] FCA 1117, cited Re Coldham; Ex parte Brideson [No 2] (1990) 170 CLR 267, cited Builders Licensing Board v Sperway Constructions (Syd) Pty Ltd (1976) 135 CLR 616, cited Bennett v Government of the United Kingdom [2000] FCA 916, followed Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Kainhofer (1995) 185 CLR 528, cited MAXWELL JOHN HESLEHURST v THE GOVERNMENT OF NEW ZEALAND, MS ORCHISTON MAGISTRATE & MR BEVERIDGE MAGISTRATE N 301 of 2000 BRANSON J SYDNEY 15 SEPTEMBER 2000

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 301 of 2000

BETWEEN: MAXWELL JOHN HESLEHURST

APPLICANT

AND: THE GOVERNMENT OF NEW ZEALAND

FIRST RESPONDENT

MS ORCHISTON MAGISTRATE

SECOND RESPONDENT

MR BEVERIDGE MAGISTRATE

THIRD RESPONDENT