R v Greenfield (Costs) [2024] NSWSC 1126

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Greenfield (Costs) [2024] NSWSC 1126 Hearing dates: 8 August 2024 Date of orders: 05 September 2024 Decision date: 05 September 2024 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Cavanagh J Decision: The application for a certificate pursuant to s 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 (NSW) is dismissed. Catchwords: CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – Costs – application for certificate pursuant to Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 – where applicant acquitted of charge of murder by a jury – whether there must be new evidence which emerges at trial for a certificate to be granted – whether reasonable to institute proceedings Legislation Cited: Coroners Act 2009 (NSW), s 78 Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 (NSW), ss 2, 3 Cases Cited: Mordaunt v Director of Public Prosecutions & Anor (2007) 171 A Crim R 510 R v Johnston [2000] NSWCCA 197 Category: Costs Parties: Stephen Shane Greenfield (Applicant/Accused) Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent/Crown) Representation: Counsel: I Nash (Applicant/Accused) G Tabuteau (Respondent/Crown)

Solicitors: AA Criminal Lawyers (Applicant/Accused) Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent/Crown) File Number(s): 2020/00326217 Publication restriction: Nil

JUDGMENT 1. Pursuant to a Notice of Motion filed on 18 July 2024, the applicant seeks the issue of a certificate pursuant to s 2 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 (NSW) ("the Act"). The Crown opposes the application. 2. At some time before 10:00am on 20 September 2015, Reginald George Mullaly ("the deceased") died, having been stabbed a number of times. He was found in the place where he usually slept, under the Denison bridge in Bathurst, on that Sunday morning. 3. Five years later, that is on 16 November 2020, the applicant was charged with his murder. 4. During the period 20 May 2024 – 5 July 2024, the applicant stood trial before a jury in the Supreme Court at Bathurst. On 5 July 2024, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty. 5. The applicant now seeks a certificate so that he may recover costs on the basis that, as set out in s 3(1) of the Act, if the prosecution had, before the proceedings were instituted, been in possession of evidence of all the relevant facts, it would not have been reasonable to institute the proceedings.