Norris v Government of the United States of America
[2010] UKSC 9
Independent editorial summary — not the official judgment. Read the full judgment via the source link.
Ratio Decidendi
There is no separate threshold test of exceptional circumstances for an article 8 challenge to extradition; the question is simply one of proportionality, and only the gravest effects of interference with family life will be capable of outweighing the public interest in honouring extradition arrangements.
Facts
Ian Norris, the former Chief Executive Officer of Morgan Crucible plc, was indicted in Pennsylvania on one charge of price-fixing and three charges of obstructing justice; the price-fixing charge was later ruled non-extraditable because price-fixing was not then a criminal offence under English law, but the obstruction of justice charges were held extraditable. Mr Norris and his wife, both elderly and in poor physical and mental health after several years of legal proceedings, argued that his extradition to face the remaining obstruction of justice charges would be a disproportionate interference with their right to respect for family life under article 8 ECHR.
Judgment Summary
The Supreme Court held that there is no free-standing legal test of 'exceptionality' for resisting extradition on article 8 grounds; the correct test is one of proportionality between the interference with family life and the public interest in extradition. Applying that test, the court held that only the gravest effects of interference with family life can render extradition disproportionate, and that the couple's ill-health and the hardship caused by the lengthy proceedings, while real, did not reach that threshold given the seriousness of the obstruction of justice allegations. The court accordingly dismissed the appeal.
Key Quotes
"Amongst the issues arising was the correct approach to the question raised by section 82 as to whether the passage of time makes extradition unjust."
— Lord Phillips(verbatim, verified against the judgment)
Subsequent Treatment
Regularly cited in extradition appeals involving delay.
What To Do Next
Get Professional Help