The Minister for Justice & Equality v Lipinski

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: the Chief Justice
• Judgment Date: 13 February 2018
• Neutral Citation: [2018] IESC 8
• Docket Number: Record No. 66/2016
• Court: Supreme Court
• Date: 13 February 2018

In the Matter of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003

Between/

The Minister for Justice and Equality

Applicant/Respondent

and

Arkadiusz Piotr Lipinski

[2018] IESC 8

Record No. 66/2016

THE SUPREME COURT

European arrest warrant – Surrender – European law – Appellant seeking to appeal against his surrender – Whether, on a proper construction of the relevant legal materials, surrender could be ordered in the particular circumstances

Facts: A sentence imposed by a Polish court, when part-served, was initially suspended but, by a subsequent order, reinstated without notification being effected of the hearing which led to that reinstatement. The issue which arose on appeal was whether, in all the circumstances, those facts precluded the surrender of the respondent/appellant, Mr Lipinski, on foot of an otherwise valid European Arrest Warrant. In a judgment delivered on the 17th June, 2015 the High Court (Donnelly J) found in favour of the applicant/respondent, the Minister for Justice and Equality, and ordered the surrender of Mr Lipinski ([2015] IEHC 458). Mr Lipinski appealed from that decision to the Court of Appeal. By a judgment delivered on the 12th May, 2016 by Peart J the appeal was dismissed ([2016] IECA 145). Mr Lipinski applied for and was granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court by a determination dated the 4th July, 2016 ([2016] IESCDET 96). At the hearing of the appeal it was accepted by counsel on both sides that the issue was whether, on a proper construction of the relevant legal materials, surrender could be ordered in the particular circumstances surrounding various hearings in Poland involving Mr Lipinski. Clarke J held that it did not seem that the material question of the proper interpretation of Article 4a of the Framework Decision is acte clair. The Court, being a court of final appeal, held that there must be a reference of that issue to the Court of Justice of the European Union under Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

Held by Clarke CJ that, subsequent to the decision of the Court to make a reference to the Court of Justice, the issues which the Court sought to raise had been definitively determined by the Court of Justice in other proceedings being S³awomir Andrzej Zdziaszek (Case C-271/17 PPU) and Samet Ardic (Case C-571/17 PPU). The Court noted that those issues had been determined in a manner unfavourable to the arguments which Mr Lipinski sought to advance.

Clarke CJ held that Mr Lipinski's appeal must fail.

Appeal dismissed.

Judgment of the Chief Justice delivered the 13th February, 2018

1. Introduction

1.1 This Court has already delivered a judgment on this appeal on the 22nd May 2017. A panel consisting of the current formation of this Court together with the now retired Denham C.J. and Laffoy J. unanimously determined that it was necessary to refer questions of European law to the Court of Justice, under Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, arising out of the proper interpretation of Article 4a of Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA as amended by Council Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA ('The Framework Decision').

1.2 The facts of this case are fully set out in my judgment delivered on that occasion ( Minister for Justice and Equality v. Lipinski [2017] IESC 26) and it is unnecessary to set them out again. Furthermore, the legal issues which arose on this appeal and the reasons why this Court felt it necessary to refer questions to the Court of Justice are also set out in that judgment.

1.3 However, after those questions had been referred to the Court of Justice, there were further procedural developments which it is necessary to address.

2. The Process after the Reference

2.1 The judgment and order of reference of this Court was transmitted to the Court of Justice on the 14th June 2017. On the 31st August 2017, the Registrar of this Court received a letter from the Registrar of the CJEU, enquiring whether, in the light of judgments delivered by the Court of Justice in Tadas Tupikas ( Case C-270-17 PPU) and S ³awomir Andrzej Zdziaszek ( Case C-271/17 PPU) it was considered necessary for this Court to obtain the answers to the specific questions raised in the reference in these proceedings.

2.2 On the 21st September 2017, the Registrar of this Court indicated to the Court of Justice that the above referenced judgments of that Court appeared to dispose of at...