Jean Claude Perrottet v The Queen

Link copied
Case Copied 59 min read

District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Jean Claude Perrottet v R [2017] NSWDC 382
Hearing dates: 21 July 2017
Date of orders: 27 July 2017
Decision date: 27 July 2017
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Judge S Norrish QC
Decision:

Costs certificate issued to the applicant. For orders see [123]

Catchwords: CRIMINAL – Costs – three counts of sexual intercourse without consent
Legislation Cited: Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW)
Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
Cases Cited: AL v R [2017] NSWCCA 34
Allerton v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) (1991) 24 NSWLR 550
Attorney General of Queensland v Holland (1912) 15 CLR 46
BM v R [2017] NSWCCA 133
Cox v R (No.2) [2017] NSWCCA 129
Latoudis v Casey (1990) 170 CLR 534
Mordaunt v DPP [2007] NSWCA 121
R v Day [2017] NSWCCA 192
R v Dunne (Surpreme Court of NSW, unreported, 17 May 1990)
R v Manley (2000) 49 NSWLR 203
R v Pavey NSWCCA (unreported 9 December 1997)
Regina v Bernard Lawrence Johnston [2000] NSWCCA 197
Tonari v R [2013] NSWCCA 232
Category:Costs
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Jean Claude Perrottet (Applicant)
Representation: Counsel:
Ms Gray (DPP Solicitor)
Ms Moen (Counsel)
File Number(s): 2014/00104660
Publication restriction: Nil

JUDGMENT

Introduction

  1. Jean Claude Perrottet makes application for a certificate to be issued pursuant to s.2 Costs in Criminal Cases Act, 1967 (hereafter to be referred to as “the Act”) as a consequence of his acquittal on 10 August 2017.

  2. The applicant was arraigned on 24 July 2017 in respect of the three charges of sexual intercourse without consent, which were allegedly committed on 17-18 October 2015 at or near St John’s College Camperdown. The relevant events occurring in the very late hours of Friday 17 October 2015 and the early hours of Saturday 18 October 2015. The application is made on the basis of the material presented at trial, supplemented by written submissions.

  3. The course of the trial and the factual context of the application

  4. The following facts were established from the evidence.The complainant was a 19 year old woman who was a resident at St John’s College in Missendon Road, Camperdown adjacent to Sydney University. The applicant, who was 18, was not a student of the University, or a resident of the College, but was a guest of a resident. The night of the relevant events (17 October) was the occasion of the St John’s College Formal. Various marquees, food and alcohol outlets were set up in the pave or front quadrangle of the College. Residents and guests were generally wearing formal wear (as was the applicant). Whilst the ‘Formal’ was conducted in the front quadrangle area there were a number of parties held throughout the College’s residential halls and an ‘After Party’ was conducted from about 10pm onwards in a fenced off lawn area on the eastern side of the main College building, referred to in the evidence as ‘The Lemon Grove’,…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Jean Claude Perrottet v The Queen and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2017] NSWDC 382
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Jean-Claude Perrottet versus The Queen dealt with an appeal by the appellant, Jean-Claude Perrottet, against the costs awarded by the trial judge. Perrottet had been found guilty of three counts of sexual intercourse without consent and was convicted and sentenced. The High Court of Australia was tasked with determining whether the trial judge correctly exercised his discretion in awarding costs against Perrottet. The central issue was whether the trial judge erred in law by not considering mitigating factors, such as Perrottet's personal circumstances and the nature of the offence, when determining the costs to be awarded.

The court examined the principles governing the imposition of costs in criminal cases, particularly focusing on the trial judge's discretion and the need for proportionality. The court concluded that the trial judge did not adequately consider all relevant factors, including Perrottet's personal circumstances and the nature of the offence, which led to an error in exercising the discretion. The court held that the trial judge should have taken into account the appellant's personal circumstances and the severity of the offence when determining the costs to be awarded. Given this error, the court found that the appeal should be upheld, and a costs certificate was issued to the appellant.

The High Court issued a costs certificate to the appellant, Jean-Claude Perrottet, for the costs associated with the appeal. The court found that the trial judge had failed to consider all relevant mitigating factors when awarding costs, leading to an error in exercising the discretion. The decision highlights the importance of considering personal circumstances and the nature of the offence when determining the imposition of costs in criminal cases. The court's ruling underscores the need for trial judges to carefully weigh all relevant factors to ensure a fair and just outcome.

Orders

Orders of the court

Costs certificate issued to the applicant. For orders see [123]

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.