Regina v Abdul Darwiche [2006] NSWSC 878

Regina v Abdul Darwiche [2006] NSWSC 878

The Court declined the certificate because, on the relevant facts known at trial, it was not satisfied that it would have been unreasonable to institute the proceedings. Farouk Razzak was familiar with Abdul Darwiche and purported to recognise him; the reliability of that identification in difficult circumstances was a critical issue but was properly for the tribunal of fact. Farouk Razzak was not demonstrably lacking in credit, his explanation for delay in nominating the shooters was not inherently improbable, and Khaled Taleb's statement would have strengthened rather than weakened the prosecution case if relied on.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 August 2006
Procedural Posture
Costs Application / Application for a Certificate Under S 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 After Acquittal
Outcome
Certificate declined
Legal Topics
['costs in Criminal Cases' 'certificate After Acquittal' 'reasonableness of Instituting Proceedings' 'identification Evidence']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'costs'] ['costs in Criminal Cases' 'certificate After Acquittal' 'reasonableness of Instituting Proceedings' 'identification Evidence']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Costs Application / Application for a Certificate Under S 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 After Acquittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a certificate should be granted under s 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 after the accused was acquitted.' 'Whether, if the prosecution had before proceedings were instituted been in possession of evidence of all relevant facts, it would not have been reasonable to institute the proceedings.' 'Whether the evidence identifying Abdul Darwiche as one of the shooters was so weak or unreliable that proceedings were unreasonable to institute.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court declined the certificate because, on the relevant facts known at trial, it was not satisfied that it would have been unreasonable to institute the proceedings. Farouk Razzak was familiar with Abdul Darwiche and purported to recognise him; the reliability of that identification in difficult circumstances was a critical issue but was properly for the tribunal of fact. Farouk Razzak was not demonstrably lacking in credit, his explanation for delay in nominating the shooters was not inherently improbable, and Khaled Taleb's statement would have strengthened rather than weakened the prosecution case if relied on.

Court Disposition

Certificate declined

Orders

  • ['The Court declines to issue a certificate under s 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967.']