Extradition documents were drafted in May 2015 but were not submitted to the public prosecution department until a year later, and were not approved for a further four years.
New Zealand authorities finally received the request in February 2022 — seven years after the man had first left Australia.
He was arrested in October that year, two months before his partner gave birth to their first child, but was later released on bail.
Justice Rebecca Ellis said there was nothing to suggest the man was aware that he was wanted in connection to the incident.
“There has been, and can be, no suggestion that the man has taken any steps to avoid a criminal process that he did not know about.
“Indeed, he returned to Australia several times during the eight-year period without impediment or alert. As far as I am aware, his whereabouts have always been readily ascertainable.”
The father-of-one had no criminal convictions, the High Court decision said.
He was the family breadwinner and a valued member of the community where he lived.
He accepted he was eligible for surrender under the Extradition Act but wanted the court to use its discretion under the same law.
Justice Ellis found it would be unjust or oppressive to surrender him to Australia based on the amount of time that had passed and because of the man’s circumstances.
If extradited, he would be taken almost 6000 kilometres away and would probably have to wait months (or even years) until trial, during which time he would be unlikely to receive bail in Australia.
While she considered whether the case should go before the relevant minister, the judge ultimately decided that was not necessary.
Australia is looking to overturn the High Court judgement and has been granted leave to bring the case back to court.
The appeal will focus on whether the court’s ruling that it would be “oppressive” for the man to be extradited was a correct reading of the law.
