Case information

None.

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 — Evidence — Whether B.C. and Ontario courts of appeal have correctly interpreted ss. 29(1)(a) and 32(1)(c) of the Extradition Act, S.C. 1999, c. 18, and the case law governing justification for committal and the admissibility of evidence adduced by persons sought for extradition — Whether there is a distinction between “reliability” and “credibility” for the purpose of s. 32(1)(c) — Whether exculpatory evidence is relevant to the Minister’s determination as to whether surrender would be unjust or oppressive — Extradition Act, S.C. 1999, ss. 29(1)(a), 32(1)(c).

The applicant was sought for extradition by the United States on charges equivalent to the Canadian offences of fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud. An extradition judge concluded there was admissible evidence that would justify the applicant’s committal for trial in Canada and accordingly ordered him committed to await surrender. The Minister of Justice subsequently ordered the applicant surrendered to the United States and refused his request to reconsider that surrender decision. The applicant simultaneously appealed the extradition judge’s committal order and applied for judicial review of the Minister’s surrender order.

The Court of Appeal for British Columbia dismissed the appeal and the application for judicial review. The Court of Appeal held that the extradition judge did not err, either in her refusal to order a voir dire, or in her refusal to admit evidence the applicant proffered at the committal hearing. The court further held that there was no basis for interfering with the committal order or concluding the Minister’s decision to order surrender was unreasonable.