The Supreme Court dismissed Perry Wharrie’s appeal in a case concerning his surrender under the European Arrest Warrant scheme. It also refused his application to adjourn the appeal so that he could seek to amend his notice of appeal.
In an ex tempore ruling delivered on 27 October 2016, the Court recorded that counsel for Wharrie accepted the appeal, as formulated, must fail because its grounds had been overtaken by the Court’s recent decision in *Balmer v Minister for Justice and Equality* [2016] IESC 25.
Counsel sought an adjournment to apply to introduce a new argument concerning the UK’s prospective exit from the European Union and the European Arrest Warrant scheme. Wharrie’s surrender had been postponed under section 18 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 while he served a sentence in Ireland, which the ruling said was expected to continue until approximately 2020.
During discussion, counsel for the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform stated that a person could argue that surrender was not permitted because of new circumstances arising after a section 16 order and before surrender. Counsel also stated that an existing section 16 order would not prevent such an argument.
On that basis, the Court refused the adjournment application and said it would dismiss the appeal. The ruling did not determine whether any new circumstances would arise or whether they would ultimately prevent surrender.