Sica v Crime and Corruption Commission

In the matter of Sica v Crime and Corruption Commission, the primary issue was the determination of costs between the parties, following the withdrawal of an application for judicial review by Mr Sica. The applicant, Mr Sica, had previously sought judicial review of the Commission's decision not to investigate his complaint about police conduct related to his murder conviction. After withdrawing the application, the remaining question was the allocation of costs between the parties. Mr Sica applied under section 49 of the Judicial Review Act 1991 for an order that both parties bear their own costs, while the Commission opposed this and sought to be awarded its costs.

The court considered the nature of Mr Sica's application, which was ultimately abandoned in favour of an alternative relief under the 2024 amendments to the Criminal Code. The court also noted that Mr Sica was impecunious. The relevant statutory provision, section 49(2)(b) of the Judicial Review Act, allows for a deviation from the usual rule that the losing party pays costs if the court considers it appropriate due to public interest. The court examined the purpose of this provision, finding that challenges to executive decisions often raise broader issues beyond the parties involved. This was illustrated by various cases where public interest considerations led to different cost outcomes.

In light of the above, the court dismissed Mr Sica's application for an order under section 49 of the Judicial Review Act 1991. It concluded that the circumstances did not warrant a deviation from the usual rule and ordered Mr Sica to pay the Commission's costs of the proceedings, including the application for orders under section 49 of the Judicial Review Act 1991, on the standard basis.