HADDON & ANOR -v- ROBERT WILLIAM EVERITT on behalf of the COMMISSIONER OF POLICE [2001] WASCA 420
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2001] WASCA 420 | |
| THE FULL COURT (WA) | |||
| Case No: | SJA:1154/1999 | 14 MAY & 16 AUGUST 2001 | |
| Coram: | KENNEDY J WALLWORK J STEYTLER J | 20/12/01 | |
| 40 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Appeal allowed Costs increased by $2,000 | ||
| B | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | CAROLE PATRICIA HADDON BRONWYN VANESSA HADDON ROBERT WILLIAM EVERITT on behalf of the COMMISSIONER OF POLICE |
Catchwords: | Costs Court of Petty Sessions Complaint dismissed Official Prosecutions (Defendants' Costs) Act 1973, s 5(5) Special order Relevance of costs scale Whether defendants entitled to costs incurred in changing solicitors |
Legislation: | Official Prosecutions (Defendants' Costs) Act 1973, s 5(5) |
Case References: | Baker v Campbell (1983) 153 CLR 52 Fewster v Briggs [2000] WASCA 36 Haag v Underdown (1968) 13 FLR 235 Haddon v Everitt [2000] WASCA 350 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 Klahn v Talbot (1995) 83 A Crim R 535 Latoudis v Casey (1990) 170 CLR 534 M v The Queen [1994] WAR 306 Newman v Byrne [1969] SASR 350 Stanley v Phillips (1966) 115 CLR 470 Washbourne v State Energy Commission of Western Australia (1992) 8 WAR 188 Anderson v Bank of British Columbia (1876) 2 Ch D 644 AWA Ltd v Daniels, unreported; SCt of NSW (Rogers CJ); No 50271 of 1991; 8 October 1992 Cilli v Abbott (1981) 53 FLR 108 Dempster v National Companies & Securities Commission (1993) 9 WAR 215 Feather v Rogers (1909) 9 SR (NSW) 192 Gallagher v CSR Ltd, unreported; SCt of WA (Ipp J); Library No 940165; 31 March 1994 Gazepis v Police (1997) 70 SASR 121 Grant v Downs (1976) 135 CLR 674 Green v Espinoza, unreported; SCt of WA (Anderson J); Library No 980234; 6 May 1998 John L Pty Ltd v Attorney-General (NSW) (1987) 163 CLR 508 Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298 McEwen v Siely (1972) 21 FLR 131 McGoldrick v R [1995] 1 Qd R 553 McNeil v Bonner [1951] NTJ 820 Melouhowee Pty Ltd v Steenbohm, unreported; SCt of NSW (Waddell CJ); Library No BC 9202093; 6 February 1992 O'Donnell v Dawe [1905] VLR 538 Pettitt v Dunkley [1971] 1 NSWLR 376 R v Kent; Ex parte McIntosh (1970) 17 FLR 65 R v McGoldrick (1994) 71 A Crim R 152 R v Phipps; Ex parte Alton [1964] 2 QB 420 R v Shaw (1991) 57 A Crim R 425 Robson v Carter, unreported; FCt SCt of WA; Library No 4511; 19 May 1982 Seaford Court Estates Ltd v Asher [1949] 2 KB 481 Shewchuck v Total Western Transport Pty Ltd (1998) 105 A Crim R 72 Spautz v Williams [1983] 2 NSWLR 506 Walton v Gardiner (1993) 177 CLR 378 Waugh v British Railways Board [1980] AC 521 Wilde v The Queen (1988) 164 CLR 365 Williams v Spautz (1992) 174 CLR 509 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN…
Continue reading Haddon v Everitt
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
- AGLC
- Haddon v Everitt [2001] WASCA 420
- Case
- [2001] WASCA 420
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of Haddon versus Everitt was heard in the Court of Petty Sessions. The dispute centred around the matter of costs incurred by the defendants. The defendants sought an order for their costs, which they claimed were necessary due to a change in solicitors. The complainant, Haddon, argued against the granting of the order, asserting that the costs were not justified under the Official Prosecutions (Defendants' Costs) Act 1973.
The central legal issue before the court was whether the defendants were entitled to the costs they incurred from changing solicitors. This issue required the court to interpret section 5(5) of the Act, which deals with the recovery of costs by defendants in certain circumstances. The court had to determine whether the change of solicitors was a sufficient ground for awarding costs and whether the relevance of the costs scale should be considered in this context.
The court held that the defendants were entitled to the costs incurred from changing solicitors. The court reasoned that the change in solicitors was a necessary step taken by the defendants in the course of their legal proceedings. The court also found that the costs scale was relevant in determining the appropriate amount of costs to be awarded. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal and increased the costs by $2,000.
In summary, the court found in favour of the defendants, allowing their appeal and increasing the costs by $2,000. This decision was based on the interpretation of section 5(5) of the Official Prosecutions (Defendants' Costs) Act 1973 and the relevance of the costs scale in determining the appropriate amount of costs to be awarded.
The central legal issue before the court was whether the defendants were entitled to the costs they incurred from changing solicitors. This issue required the court to interpret section 5(5) of the Act, which deals with the recovery of costs by defendants in certain circumstances. The court had to determine whether the change of solicitors was a sufficient ground for awarding costs and whether the relevance of the costs scale should be considered in this context.
The court held that the defendants were entitled to the costs incurred from changing solicitors. The court reasoned that the change in solicitors was a necessary step taken by the defendants in the course of their legal proceedings. The court also found that the costs scale was relevant in determining the appropriate amount of costs to be awarded. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal and increased the costs by $2,000.
In summary, the court found in favour of the defendants, allowing their appeal and increasing the costs by $2,000. This decision was based on the interpretation of section 5(5) of the Official Prosecutions (Defendants' Costs) Act 1973 and the relevance of the costs scale in determining the appropriate amount of costs to be awarded.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal allowed
Costs increased by $2,000
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.