Summary

Keywords

Criminal law.

Summary

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Criminal law - Extradition - Judicial review - Appellants determined to be Convention refugees - Minister of Justice ordering that they be extradited - Court of Appeal dismissing their application for judicial review - Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that Minister could order extradition of Appellants even though they are protected by principle of non-refoulement applicable to Convention refugees - Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that Minister of Justice had not exceeded his jurisdiction in concluding that change in circumstances had occurred in Hungary as regards treatment of Rom minority, whereas only Immigration and Refugee Board has authority to decide that such change has occurred - Whether Court of Appeal erred in upholding decision of Minister of Justice to extradite appellants even though that decision is contrary to decision rendered by tribunal of competent jurisdiction in Canada.

On arriving in Canada in 2001, the Appellants, who are a couple, applied for refugee status for themselves and their children, alleging that acts of violence had been committed against them in their country of origin, Hungary. Their application was based on three incidents between 1997 and 2001 in which the male Appellant, together on one occasion with the female Appellant, was attacked by Hungarian citizens because of their Gypsy (or Rom) ethnic origin. The Appellants and their children were determined to be Convention refugees and became permanent residents. Some two years later, Hungary issued an international arrest warrant in respect of a charge of fraud that had been laid against the Appellants.