High Court certifies important point of law going to the meaning of extradition

Sint Maarten requests the extradition of OB in circumstances where it is proposed that OB will not set foot in Sint Maarten but will be detained in either the Netherlands or Aruba. OB argues that it is an abuse of the court’s process to order the extradition of a requested person to the requesting territory when it is known that he will never set foot in that territory.

On 5 February 2025, the High Court (Kerr J) concluded that “extradition to a particular "territory" includes removal of the requested person to a place not physically within that territory, but where its law applies to the criminal proceedings and where it has and exercises jurisdiction over the requested person at his trial”. Kerr J thereby dismissed OB’s appeal.

Thereafter, Kerr J certified that a point of law of general public importance is involved in OB’s case, namely: “What is the correct interpretation of the words “extradited to the territory to which his extradition is requested” in s.93(4) of the Extradition Act 2003?”. Kerr J refused leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, and OB will directly petition the Supreme Court for leave.

Graeme Hall represents OB, and is instructed by Katy Smart and Enrico Braguglia of Sonn Macmillan Walker Solicitors.

Peter Caldwell represents the Government of Sint Maarten, and is instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service, Extradition Unit.