Regina v Hatfield [2001] NSWSC 334

Regina v Hatfield [2001] NSWSC 334

Even accepting that the cross-examination substantially attacked Mr Busby's credibility and raised doubts about Ms Periera's reliability, the whole of the relevant evidence included significant corroborative material, including the tape recordings, the applicant's recorded statements, Mr Heilpern's evidence about Mr Busby's contemporaneous disclosure and condition, and the earlier investigative evidence. If the prosecution had known all relevant facts before instituting proceedings, it would nevertheless have been reasonable to institute the proceedings; therefore the statutory condition for a certificate was not satisfied.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 September 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Law Costs Application Under Costs of Criminal Cases Act 1967 / Post Acquittal Application for a Certificate Under S 2
Outcome
Application refused.
Legal Topics
['certificate Under Costs of Criminal Cases Act 1967' 'reasonableness of Instituting Criminal Proceedings' 'credibility of Prosecution Witnesses' 'acquittal After Trial']
['criminal Law' 'costs'] ['certificate Under Costs of Criminal Cases Act 1967' 'reasonableness of Instituting Criminal Proceedings' 'credibility of Prosecution Witnesses' 'acquittal After Trial']

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 Costs of Criminal Cases Act 1967 / Post Acquittal Application for a Certificate Under S 2

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a certificate should be granted under s 2 of the Costs of Criminal Cases Act 1967 after the applicant was acquitted of murder.' 'Whether, if the prosecution had before the proceedings were instituted been in possession of evidence of all relevant facts, it would not have been reasonable to institute the proceedings.' 'Whether attacks on the credibility of Atticus Busby and Lourdes Periera made it unreasonable for the Crown to have relied on their evidence.']

Ratio Decidendi

Even accepting that the cross-examination substantially attacked Mr Busby's credibility and raised doubts about Ms Periera's reliability, the whole of the relevant evidence included significant corroborative material, including the tape recordings, the applicant's recorded statements, Mr Heilpern's evidence about Mr Busby's contemporaneous disclosure and condition, and the earlier investigative evidence. If the prosecution had known all relevant facts before instituting proceedings, it would nevertheless have been reasonable to institute the proceedings; therefore the statutory condition for a certificate was not satisfied.

Court Disposition

Application refused.

Orders

  • ['Application for a certificate under s 2 of the Costs of Criminal Cases Act 1967 is refused.']