User:Ems2426/sandbox

I will write my draft here.

A Wikipedia article is written in a neutral point of view. Do not editorialize; you should support any claims by citing reputable sources. For an Irish Supreme Court case your article should consist of an accurate summary of the case including the background, the arguments in the case, and a clear explanation of the Court's decision and its significance.

The first section of an article is the lead. Its job is to provide a short summary and, crucially, communicate the significance of the topic. The lead should only be a sentence or two long. You must include a citation to at least one source from Westlaw IE when you describe the significance of the case. Review the video on Moodle that shows how to find sources using Westlaw IE. If you have trouble finding sources then please ask for help. Your lead should resemble:

Minister for Justice and Equality v Ostrowski, [2013] IESC 24; [2013] 4 IR 206, was a Irish Supreme Court case in which the Court held ...

(It is easiest to edit using the 'visual editor' rather than editing the source of the article. If you are not sure how to set your preferences please review the tutorial video on Moodle).

(You do not have to add the table of contents; Wikipedia does this automatically.)

Infobox, located at the right of the article in its own box (this is 'sub-heading 1')
Every Irish Supreme Court case should use the infobox court case template. This can be the last part to add to your article. When you are in edit mode you can click on the infobox and select edit or you can use "edit source" to add information. If you have any trouble with the infobox post a message on the Moodle discussion forum asking for help.

What belongs here:
This section includes facts of the dispute, its history in lower courts, and relevant historical/political context. Subsections may include history, facts of the case, procedural history or lower courts (or even a subsection for each lower court, appropriately titled), and petition (for certiorari). You can cite the judgement when you are summarizing the facts of the case.

Oral arguments can go at the end of this section if you choose the "Opinion of the Court" style (see full explanation below).

* Ostrowski, a Polish national was subject to a European Arrest Warrant provided by Poland as the issuing country. He was expected to surrender the offence of possessing an illegal drug. This offence was noted to be committed while he was in Poland on holidays on 11th May 2006. A European arrest warrant was issued on the 7th January 2009 awaiting his surrender to be tried for the offence in Poland. In Poland the maximum sentence for an offence of this nature is 3 years imprisonment. Ostrowski refused surrender to the Polish authorities which led the Minister for Justice and Equality to bring the case to court to be given an order to effect the warrant, granting Poland permission to bring Ostrowski back and try him there. However there were issues in obtaining a court order to effect the warrant as it came in conflict with Ostrowski's Human Rights under the Declaration of Human Rights as well as the question of proportionality was raised. Ostrowski and his family all resided in Ireland and have been since 2004. There was a second European Arrest Warrant issued on the 15th of April 2010 which the High Court once again refused on 8th December 2011.

Opinion of the Court
This section should contain a summary of the Court's opinion as well as any important events of note that occurred during the case. Use this section for excerpts from the decision and precedents cited.

Subsections or a paragraph for concurring and dissenting opinions can also be added as appropriate. Should be in the form of "Concurrences" and "Dissents" for section headers.

* This was originally a high court case in which the high court submitted a question to the Supreme court on the basis of proportionality. the question was considering whether proportionality was to be taken into account by the country which issued the arrest warrant or if the country which was ordered to surrender the person in question could take this into account as well. Ostrowski stated that the arrest warrant went against his human rights namely article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights. Article 8 declares the right to respect of private and family life for all European citizens. Ostrowski here argued that this right was violated if he was to surrender and be transported to Poland. However in accordance section 16 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 the High Court refused to surrender Ostrowski.

Subsequent developments
This is an optional section. Whether your article has it or not depends on the sources you find on Westlaw IE.Cases that clarify/reverse; relevant developments for the parties or dispute (outcome of remand/"Nixon turned over his tapes..."), social effects. Be sure to include citations in support of any claim you make here about the case's subsequent impact.

Refer forward to subsequent cases citing this decision as precedent.

Infobox, located at the right of the article in its own box (this is 'sub-heading 1')
Every Irish Supreme Court case should use the infobox court case template. This can be the last part to add to your article. When you are in edit mode you can click on the infobox and select edit or you can use "edit source" to add information. If you have any trouble with the infobox post a message on the Moodle discussion forum asking for help.

What belongs here:
This section includes facts of the dispute, its history in lower courts, and relevant historical/political context. Subsections may include history, facts of the case, procedural history or lower courts (or even a subsection for each lower court, appropriately titled), and petition (for certiorari). You can cite the judgement when you are summarizing the facts of the case.

Oral arguments can go at the end of this section if you choose the "Opinion of the Court" style (see full explanation below).

Opinion of the Court
This section should contain a summary of the Court's opinion as well as any important events of note that occurred during the case. Use this section for excerpts from the decision and precedents cited.

Subsections or a paragraph for concurring and dissenting opinions can also be added as appropriate. Should be in the form of "Concurrences" and "Dissents" for section headers.

Subsequent developments
This is an optional section. Whether your article has it or not depends on the sources you find on Westlaw IE.Cases that clarify/reverse; relevant developments for the parties or dispute (outcome of remand/"Nixon turned over his tapes..."), social effects. Be sure to include citations in support of any claim you make here about the case's subsequent impact.

Refer forward to subsequent cases citing this decision as precedent.