Hariz v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2021] NSWCA 264

Hariz v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2021] NSWCA 264

The District Court did not commit jurisdictional error in its assessment or awarding of costs, as it correctly identified the statutory criteria, acted within its broad discretion, considered relevant evidence (including invoices), and gave no rise to procedural unfairness; the applicant failed to demonstrate unreasonableness, procedural unfairness, or material prejudice warranting judicial intervention.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 October 2021
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Application / Court of Appeal Judgment After Hearing on 25 October 2021
Outcome
Summons dismissed
Legal Topics
['supervisory Jurisdiction' 'costs Assessment' 'procedural Fairness' 'jurisdictional Error']
['criminal Law' 'judicial Review' 'procedure'] ['supervisory Jurisdiction' 'costs Assessment' 'procedural Fairness' 'jurisdictional Error']

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

Judicial Review Application / Court of Appeal Judgment After Hearing on 25 October 2021

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the District Court committed jurisdictional error in making a costs order after a successful criminal appeal' 'Whether the applicant was denied procedural fairness in the quantification of costs and the awarding of costs against him' 'Whether the judge failed to have regard to relevant evidence and submissions in assessing costs']

Ratio Decidendi

The District Court did not commit jurisdictional error in its assessment or awarding of costs, as it correctly identified the statutory criteria, acted within its broad discretion, considered relevant evidence (including invoices), and gave no rise to procedural unfairness; the applicant failed to demonstrate unreasonableness, procedural unfairness, or material prejudice warranting judicial intervention.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed

Orders

  • ['Dismiss the summons filed 18 August 2021.' 'Order that the applicant pay the costs of the Director of Public Prosecutions.']