Judgment: 2020-06-12 · Court archive

Court of Appeal dismisses challenge to surrender order in 39-death case

The court upheld the High Court’s order surrendering Eamonn Harrison to the UK, finding the warrant contained sufficient information. Surrender was no longer sought on the human-trafficking conspiracy charge.

Court of Appeal · [2020] IECA 159

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Eamonn Harrison (Appellant)
What

The court upheld the High Court’s order surrendering Eamonn Harrison to the UK, finding the warrant contained sufficient information. Surrender was no longer sought on the human-trafficking conspiracy charge.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • United Kingdom
  • Zeebrugge, Belgium
  • Ireland
  • Zeebrugge
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

Harrison argued that the High Court could not rely on information supplied by the UK Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), rather than by the issuing judicial authority, where that information concerned matters that should have appeared in the warrant. The Court of Appeal said the original warrant, read as a whole, contained enough information about the alleged conduct and Harrison’s role to assess the legal requirements for surrender. It concluded that the described acts could establish correspondence with offences in Ireland.

The Court of Appeal has dismissed Eamonn Harrison’s appeal against an order for his surrender to the United Kingdom, while directing that the order reflect the withdrawal of the human-trafficking conspiracy charge.

The judgment, delivered on 12 June 2020, says the High Court had ordered Harrison’s surrender on 41 offences: 39 manslaughter charges, conspiracy to facilitate illegal immigration and conspiracy to commit human trafficking. By the time of the appeal, UK authorities were no longer pursuing the human-trafficking conspiracy charge.

The case concerns the deaths of 39 people found in a trailer that entered the UK from Zeebrugge, Belgium. The European Arrest Warrant alleged that Harrison drove the lorry that delivered the trailer to the port. The judgment records that the trailer was later transported to the UK and collected by another driver. These are allegations in the warrant, not findings of criminal guilt.

Harrison argued that the High Court could not rely on information supplied by the UK Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), rather than by the issuing judicial authority, where that information concerned matters that should have appeared in the warrant. The Court of Appeal said the original warrant, read as a whole, contained enough information about the alleged conduct and Harrison’s role to assess the legal requirements for surrender. It concluded that the described acts could establish correspondence with offences in Ireland.

The court also addressed the CPS information. It held that the High Court was entitled to consider it under the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 and the EU Framework Decision. The appellate judgment said the High Court had appropriately assessed that material, and found no challenge to the prosecutor’s bona fides or the accuracy of the information.

Because the court considered the original warrant sufficient, it said it did not need to decide the appeal on the additional information issue. It also declined to refer a question to the Court of Justice of the European Union or hold a further hearing about a possible reference, finding those steps unnecessary to its decision.

The appeal was dismissed, subject to the proviso that the surrender order record that surrender was no longer sought for the human-trafficking conspiracy offence. The court directed that the order not be perfected until 10 days after electronic delivery. It recommended that the State pay Harrison’s appeal costs under the Legal Aid – Custody Issues Scheme.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review