Extradition - 1985- 1989
Extradition Law. See also Immigration.
These cases are extracted from a very large database. The entries on that database are now being published individually to the main swarb.co.uk website in a much improved form. As cases are published here, the entry here will be replaced by a link to the same case in that improved form on swarb.co.uk. In addition the swarb.co.uk site includes very substantial numbers of cases after 2000. Please take the time to look.
This page lists 7 cases, and was prepared on 19 May 2014. These case are being transferred one by one to the main swarb.co.uk site which presents them better, with links to full text where we have it, and much improved cross referencing.
|Regina -v- Governor of Pentonville Prison, Ex Parte Osman  1 WLR 277|
|30 Mar 1988
QBDLloyd L.J. and French J.
|Crime, Evidence, Extradition, Police
|The applicant had been committed to prison pending extradition proceedings brought by Hong Kong alleging substantial fraud. He challenged the committal on the grounds that since the allegations involved transmission of funds over international borders, if he had committed the acts alleged in the UK an offence would not have been committed, since the funds were transmitted from abroad, and the offences were extra-territorial. Held: The act of appropriation occurred when the defendant assumed the rights of an owner. His sending of the telex was the last act he needed to do, and that would not be extra territorial. The evidence required was that upon which a properly directed jury could commit. Last, the procedure under the 1967 Act was to be similar to that in the 1870 Act. Accordingly the list of offences could be phrased in general terms, and was capable of amendment. As regards evidence from computer printouts, the provisions of subsection 2 were alternatives, and not cumulative, since section 68(1)(b) required any one of them to be present. If there was no internal evidence of malfunction, such a printout should be admitted under section 69. Once documents which may have had legal professional privilege had been produced that did not affect their later admission. Police powers of arrest and search were the same on a domestic crime as under the 1967 Act.|
|Fugitive Offenders Act 1967 5 7(5) 8 - Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 68(1)(2) - Theft Act 1968 (c. 60) 3(1) - Extradition Act 1870|
|Regina -v- Governor of Brixton Prison, ex parte Kahan  QB 716|
|The court deplored any use of an application to a Divisional Court ahead of a final determination by the committing magistrate.|