Hatzopoulos v R [2016] NSWDC 249

Hatzopoulos v R [2016] NSWDC 249

The prosecutor unreasonably failed to investigate properly the appellant's criminal history and the context of the text messages, both of which were matters the prosecutor ought reasonably have been aware of and which suggested the appellant might not be guilty or that the ADVO proceedings should not have been brought. The inaccurate and potentially misleading statements in the application and the misleading presentation of selected text messages also constituted exceptional circumstances relating to the conduct of the proceedings, making it just and reasonable to award costs under s.70 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Costs Application Arising From an Appeal Concerning an Apprehended Domestic Violence Order / Application for Costs After the District Court Allowed the Appeal From the Local Court Order
Outcome
Costs awarded in favour of the appellant against the prosecutor.
Legal Topics
['costs Against Prosecutor' 'apprehended Domestic Violence Order Appeal' 'failure to Investigate' 'misleading Evidence' 'police Prosecutor Obligations']
['criminal Law' 'costs' 'apprehended Domestic Violence Orders'] ['costs Against Prosecutor' 'apprehended Domestic Violence Order Appeal' 'failure to Investigate' 'misleading Evidence' 'police Prosecutor Obligations']

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 Costs Application Arising From an Appeal Concerning an Apprehended Domestic Violence Order / Application for Costs After the District Court Allowed the Appeal From the Local Court Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether costs should be awarded against the prosecutor under s.70 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001.' 'Whether the ADVO application contained false or misleading statements about prior charges and complaints.' 'Whether the selection and tendering of text messages misled the Local Court.' 'Whether the prosecutor unreasonably failed to investigate relevant matters or whether exceptional circumstances made a costs order just and reasonable.']

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecutor unreasonably failed to investigate properly the appellant's criminal history and the context of the text messages, both of which were matters the prosecutor ought reasonably have been aware of and which suggested the appellant might not be guilty or that the ADVO proceedings should not have been brought. The inaccurate and potentially misleading statements in the application and the misleading presentation of selected text messages also constituted exceptional circumstances relating to the conduct of the proceedings, making it just and reasonable to award costs under s.70 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001.

Court Disposition

Costs awarded in favour of the appellant against the prosecutor.

Orders

  • ["That the prosecutor pay the appellant's costs of the application in the Local Court and the hearing of the appeal, including the hearing of the application for costs under s.70 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001." 'Make an order for costs in the amount of $21,561.']