DPP v Solkan Mohammad Donaczy & Anor [2007] NSWSC 923

DPP v Solkan Mohammad Donaczy & Anor [2007] NSWSC 923

The Bail Act 1978 was silent on costs for a bail review application, the relevant Local Courts Act, Criminal Procedure Act 1986, Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 and Suitors' Fund Act 1951 provisions did not authorise a costs order in those circumstances, and no power to award costs could be implied because it was not required for the effective exercise of the bail review jurisdiction. The magistrate therefore erred in law on the face of the record, and the costs order was quashed under s 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 August 2007
Procedural Posture
Summons for an Order Under S 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 / Ex Parte Hearing in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Common Law Division, Seeking to Quash a Local Court Costs Order Made on a Bail Review Application
Outcome
The Plaintiff's summons succeeded; the Local Court costs order was quashed and there was no order as to costs of the Supreme Court proceedings.
Legal Topics
['review of Bail Decision' 'local Court Powers' 'costs in Criminal Proceedings' 'certiorari and S 69 Relief' 'error of Law on the Face of the Record']
['criminal Procedure' 'bail' 'administrative Law' 'costs'] ['review of Bail Decision' 'local Court Powers' 'costs in Criminal Proceedings' 'certiorari and S 69 Relief' 'error of Law on the Face of the Record']

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

Summons for an Order Under S 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 / Ex Parte Hearing in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Common Law Division, Seeking to Quash a Local Court Costs Order Made on a Bail Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a Local Court magistrate had power to order the Director of Public Prosecutions to pay costs on an application to review bail under the Bail Act 1978.' 'Whether the costs order involved an error of law on the face of the record capable of being quashed under s 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970.' 'Whether there should be an order as to the costs of the Supreme Court proceedings.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Bail Act 1978 was silent on costs for a bail review application, the relevant Local Courts Act, Criminal Procedure Act 1986, Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 and Suitors' Fund Act 1951 provisions did not authorise a costs order in those circumstances, and no power to award costs could be implied because it was not required for the effective exercise of the bail review jurisdiction. The magistrate therefore erred in law on the face of the record, and the costs order was quashed under s 69 of the Supreme Court Act 1970.

Court Disposition

The Plaintiff's summons succeeded; the Local Court costs order was quashed and there was no order as to costs of the Supreme Court proceedings.

Orders

  • ['The award for costs made by the Second Defendant on 29 March 2007 in favour of the First Defendant is quashed.' 'No order as to the costs of these proceedings.']