Regina v Bernard Lawrence JOHNSTON [2000] NSWCCA 197

Regina v Bernard Lawrence JOHNSTON [2000] NSWCCA 197

Although the Court as presently constituted had jurisdiction to entertain the application, the applicant did not discharge the onus of showing that, had the prosecution possessed all relevant facts including the defence evidence, it would not have been reasonable to institute the proceedings. The Crown had an apparently credible complaint of serious offences, and the reliability and credibility of the complainant and defence witnesses were matters properly for a jury, notwithstanding the later conclusion that the convictions were unsustainable. The application for a costs certificate was therefore refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 May 2000
Procedural Posture
Application for a Certificate for Costs Under S 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 (nsw) After Convictions Were Quashed on Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Application Heard After Successful Conviction Appeal
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
['certificate for Costs' 'quashed Convictions' 'reasonableness of Instituting Proceedings' 'jurisdiction of Differently Constituted Court of Criminal Appeal' 'delay in Complaint' 'sexual Intercourse Without Consent in Circumstances of Aggravation']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'costs in Criminal Cases'] ['certificate for Costs' 'quashed Convictions' 'reasonableness of Instituting Proceedings' 'jurisdiction of Differently Constituted Court of Criminal Appeal' 'delay in Complaint' 'sexual Intercourse Without Consent in Circumstances of Aggravation']

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

Application for a Certificate for Costs Under S 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 (nsw) After Convictions Were Quashed on Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Application Heard After Successful Conviction Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the presently constituted Court of Criminal Appeal had jurisdiction to entertain the application for a certificate under s 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 (NSW).' 'Whether the applicant established that, if the prosecution had been in possession of all relevant facts before proceedings were instituted, it would not have been reasonable to institute the proceedings.' 'Whether any delay or discretionary consideration warranted refusal of the application.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Court as presently constituted had jurisdiction to entertain the application, the applicant did not discharge the onus of showing that, had the prosecution possessed all relevant facts including the defence evidence, it would not have been reasonable to institute the proceedings. The Crown had an apparently credible complaint of serious offences, and the reliability and credibility of the complainant and defence witnesses were matters properly for a jury, notwithstanding the later conclusion that the convictions were unsustainable. The application for a costs certificate was therefore refused.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • ['The application is refused.']