Att. Gen. v E [2012] 1 JLR 99 (23 January 2012)

Att. Gen. v E [2012] 1 JLR 99 (23 January 2012)

The Royal Court has no power under the Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law 2010 to order payment of the respondent's costs out of public funds on appeal, as such power requires express statutory provision and cannot be inferred from incidental or consequential order powers.

Citation
[2012] 1 JLR 99
Parties
Appellant: Attorney General; Respondent: E
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
23 January 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Magistrate's Court
Outcome
appeal allowed in part; no order as to costs
Legal Topics
Costs in Criminal Cases, Sex Offender Notification Period, Statutory Interpretation
Criminal Law Procedural Law Costs in Criminal Cases Sex Offender Notification Period Statutory Interpretation

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Appellant

E

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Magistrate's Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Royal Court has power under the Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law 2010 to order payment of respondent's costs out of public funds on appeal
  2. 2 Whether such power can be inferred from the Law's incidental or consequential order provision
  3. 3 Applicability of Costs in Criminal Cases (Jersey) Law 1961 to appeals from Magistrate's Court

Ratio Decidendi

The Royal Court has no power under the Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law 2010 to order payment of the respondent's costs out of public funds on appeal, as such power requires express statutory provision and cannot be inferred from incidental or consequential order powers.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part; no order as to costs

Orders

  • No order for payment of respondent's costs out of public funds