Solomons v District Court of New South Wales [2002] HCA 47

Solomons v District Court of New South Wales [2002] HCA 47

A State court exercising federal jurisdiction is not empowered, by operation of s 68(2) or s 79 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), to grant a certificate under s 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 (NSW) to a person acquitted of a federal (Commonwealth) offence, as applying the scheme in this context would require impermissible alteration to the meaning of the State law and would unconstitutionally impose obligations on the State to pay costs from its Consolidated Revenue Fund without the necessary constitutional authority.

Parties
Appellant: Cecil Gregory Solomons; First Respondent: District Court of New South Wales; Second Respondent: State of New South Wales; Third Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions (Commonwealth)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 October 2002
Procedural Posture
Appeal / High Court Appeal From Court of Appeal of Supreme Court of New South Wales
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Costs in Criminal Cases, Acquittal, Federal Jurisdiction, Application of State Law in Federal Proceedings, Judiciary Act, Costs Act Certificates
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Costs in Criminal Cases Acquittal Federal Jurisdiction Application of State Law in Federal Proceedings Judiciary Act Costs Act Certificates

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 5 Authorities cited 31 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cecil Gregory Solomons

Appellant

District Court of New South Wales

First Respondent

State of New South Wales

Second Respondent

Director of Public Prosecutions (Commonwealth)

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / High Court Appeal From Court of Appeal of Supreme Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a State court, exercising federal jurisdiction, is empowered to grant a costs certificate under s 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 (NSW) to a person acquitted of an offence against Commonwealth law
  2. 2 Whether s 68 or s 79 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) renders the provisions of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act applicable to proceedings in federal jurisdiction
  3. 3 Whether federal law can require payments from a State Consolidated Revenue Fund in these circumstances without contravening constitutional limitations

Ratio Decidendi

A State court exercising federal jurisdiction is not empowered, by operation of s 68(2) or s 79 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), to grant a certificate under s 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 (NSW) to a person acquitted of a federal (Commonwealth) offence, as applying the scheme in this context would require impermissible alteration to the meaning of the State law and would unconstitutionally impose obligations on the State to pay costs from its Consolidated Revenue Fund without the necessary constitutional authority.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Appellant to pay the costs of the appeal of the three respondents.