Brazil’s supreme court has cleared the way for the extradition of former solicitor Michael Lynn back to Ireland to face allegations of mortgage fraud.
It is alleged he owes more than €80m to at least ten financial institutions.
The court first ruled that Mr Lynn should be extradited in December 2014, but the process was delayed when he exercised his right to seek a clarification from the court.
The decision comes more than eight years after he left Ireland and almost 30 months since he was arrested near the city of Recife.
Today, presiding judge Marco Aurélio dismissed Mr Lynn’s final request to seek "clarification" of the original decision - a request on a technicality that was almost certain to fail - on all major points.
The other judges on the panel all endorsed his decision.
The judge will now publish a written version of his decision and the case will then be handed over to Brazil's justice ministry.
Officially, the ministry can overrule the court, but a spokesman confirmed last night they intend to abide by the decision.
Brazil's federal police will then negotiate the logistics of Mr Lynn’s transfer from Recife to Dublin, which could happen within weeks, with Irish authorities.
Mr Lynn failed to attend a hearing at the High Court in Dublin in 2007.
He arrived in Brazil in 2012, where he lived in a villa near a beach while teaching English to locals, joined a country club and also worked in the property market.
Brazilian federal police arrested him in August 2013.
He had been fighting extradition to Ireland ever since.
Judge Aurélio rejected Mr Lynn's lawyer's arguments on nearly all points, a decision that was endorsed by the two other judges on the panel.
"The suggestion there was no mandate for prison in Ireland, and that there was a translation error, was already clarified in the [extradition] decision [in 2014]," he said.
Only minor irregularities were upheld, such as the fact that date of his initial arrest in Brazil had been recorded as 20 August. He was arrested on 29 August.
But the judges ruled this should not affect the decision to go ahead with the extradition.