AG -v- X [2014] JRC 113B (15 May 2014)
The application for costs is refused because the defendant did not enter a guilty plea, the Crown was entitled to rely on the evidence and admissions available, and the conduct of the defence—including procedural objections and handling of the child witness—militates against awarding costs. The exercise of discretion is against the application for these reasons.
- Citation
- [2014] JRC 113B
- Parties
- Prosecution: Attorney General; Defendant: Defendant
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Judgment Date
- 15 May 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Post Trial, Application for Costs
- Outcome
- application for costs refused
- Legal Topics
- Costs in Criminal Proceedings, Exercise of Judicial Discretion, Conduct of Parties, Acquittal and Conviction on Alternative Counts, Child Witness Handling
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Attorney General
Prosecution
Defendant
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Post Trial, Application for Costs
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defendant is entitled to costs following conviction on an alternative count and acquittal on others
- 2 Whether the conduct of the defence and prosecution affects the exercise of discretion to award costs
Ratio Decidendi
The application for costs is refused because the defendant did not enter a guilty plea, the Crown was entitled to rely on the evidence and admissions available, and the conduct of the defence—including procedural objections and handling of the child witness—militates against awarding costs. The exercise of discretion is against the application for these reasons.
Court Disposition
application for costs refused
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment