NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Hariz v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2021] NSWCA 264 Hearing dates: 25 October 2021 Date of orders: 29 October 2021 Decision date: 29 October 2021 Before: Basten JA at [1]; Brereton JA at [36]; Stevenson J at [37] Decision: (1) Dismiss the summons filed 18 August 2021. (2) Order that the applicant pay the costs of the Director of Public Prosecutions. Catchwords: APPEAL AND REVIEW – Court of Appeal – supervisory jurisdiction – review of costs order made by District Court on appeal from Local Court – order in favour of successful appellant – review as to quantum – grounds – failure to take account of evidence/submissions – procedural unfairness in ordering costs motion to reopen PROCEDURE – order for costs – assessment of costs by court – only evidence proffered was a bundle of invoices – invoices included work on other proceedings – amounts held to be irrelevant or excessive – judge entitled to make own assessment Legislation Cited: Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW), ss 28, 70 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), ss 212, 213, 214; Ch 4, Pt 2, Div 4 District Court Act 1973 (NSW), ss 8, 176; Pt 4 Cases Cited: Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission [1969] 2 AC 147 Craig v South Australia (1995) 184 CLR 163; [1995] HCA 58 Dempsey v Director of Public Prosecutions [2019] NSWCA 267 Hariz v NSW Director of Public Prosecutions [2020] NSWDC 394 Latoudis v Casey (1990) 170 CLR 534; [1990] HCA 59 Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v Peko-Wallsend Ltd (1986) 162 CLR 24; [1986] HCA 40 Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v SZGUR (2011) 241 CLR 594; [2011] HCA 1 MZAPC v Minister for Immigration (2021) 95 ALJR 441; [2021] HCA 17 Texts Cited: M Aronson, M Groves, G Weeks, Judicial Review of Administrative Action and Government Liability (6th ed, Lawbook Co, 2017) Category: Principal judgment Parties: Raed Hariz (Applicant) Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (First Respondent) District Court of NSW (Second Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr P D Lange (Applicant) Ms J Davidson (First Respondent) Submitting appearance (Third Respondent)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate