Higgins v R (No 2) [2022] NSWCCA 82

Higgins v R (No 2) [2022] NSWCCA 82

Given the nature of the case—a historical sexual assault matter turning on witness credibility—none of the facts relied upon by the applicant, whether taken alone or together, rendered the prosecution unreasonable. The court was not satisfied that, if the prosecution had all relevant facts, it would not have been reasonable to proceed. Questions of complainant credibility in such cases are generally for the jury.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Application for Costs Certificate Following Conviction Appeal / Judgment on the Papers, Application Under S 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 (nsw)
Outcome
Application for costs certificate dismissed.
Legal Topics
['costs in Criminal Cases' 'acquittal and Recovery of Costs' 'reasonableness of Prosecution' 'sexual Assault Trials' 'credibility of Witnesses']
['criminal Law'] ['costs in Criminal Cases' 'acquittal and Recovery of Costs' 'reasonableness of Prosecution' 'sexual Assault Trials' 'credibility of Witnesses']

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 Costs Certificate Following Conviction Appeal / Judgment on the Papers, Application Under S 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 (nsw)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether, if the prosecution had all relevant facts, it would not have been reasonable to institute the proceedings under s 3(1)(a) of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 (NSW)' 'Whether the applicant satisfied the requirements for a costs certificate under the Act']

Ratio Decidendi

Given the nature of the case—a historical sexual assault matter turning on witness credibility—none of the facts relied upon by the applicant, whether taken alone or together, rendered the prosecution unreasonable. The court was not satisfied that, if the prosecution had all relevant facts, it would not have been reasonable to proceed. Questions of complainant credibility in such cases are generally for the jury.

Court Disposition

Application for costs certificate dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Dismiss the application for a certificate under s 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 (NSW).']