R v Cardona [2002] NSWSC 823

R v Cardona [2002] NSWSC 823

Because the Crown case depended on Mr Baldacchino’s uncorroborated evidence, and that evidence was substantially lacking in credit after scrutiny at trial due to hostility, expected and obtained leniency, implausible aspects and contradiction by credible or unchallengeable evidence, the court was satisfied that if the prosecution had possessed evidence of all relevant facts it would not have been reasonable to institute proceedings against Ms Cardona; she was therefore entitled to a certificate under s 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act, 1967.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 September 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Law Costs Application Under the Costs in Criminal Cases Act, 1967 Following Acquittal on a Murder Charge / Application for a Certificate Under S 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act, 1967
Outcome
Certificate granted.
Legal Topics
['costs in Criminal Cases' 'certificate Under Costs in Criminal Cases Act, 1967' 'reasonableness of Instituting Prosecution' 'prasad Direction' 'witness Credibility' 'uncorroborated Evidence']
['criminal Law' 'costs'] ['costs in Criminal Cases' 'certificate Under Costs in Criminal Cases Act, 1967' 'reasonableness of Instituting Prosecution' 'prasad Direction' 'witness Credibility' 'uncorroborated 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

Criminal Law Costs Application Under the Costs in Criminal Cases Act, 1967 Following Acquittal on a Murder Charge / Application for a Certificate Under S 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act, 1967

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether, if the prosecution had been in possession of evidence of all the relevant facts before proceedings were instituted, it would not have been reasonable to institute proceedings against Ms Cardona.' 'Whether the Crown case, which depended on uncorroborated evidence from Lenny Emmanuel Baldacchino, was so undermined by credibility issues, implausibilities and contradictory evidence that a certificate should be granted.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the Crown case depended on Mr Baldacchino’s uncorroborated evidence, and that evidence was substantially lacking in credit after scrutiny at trial due to hostility, expected and obtained leniency, implausible aspects and contradiction by credible or unchallengeable evidence, the court was satisfied that if the prosecution had possessed evidence of all relevant facts it would not have been reasonable to institute proceedings against Ms Cardona; she was therefore entitled to a certificate under s 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act, 1967.

Court Disposition

Certificate granted.

Orders

  • ['Ms Cardona is entitled to a certificate under s 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act, 1967.']