White v Police No. Scgrg-97-1416 Judgment No. S6452

The case of White v Police involves an appeal against the costs decision made by a Special Magistrate concerning a domestic violence restraining order. The appellant, White, had been subject to an ex parte restraining order made by two justices of the peace based on an affidavit from the complainant, Cave. The appellant did not appear for the hearing to confirm the order, and it remained in effect until the matter was finally heard on 19 September 1997. On this date, the complainant indicated that she no longer wished to proceed with the complaint, leading the Magistrate to revoke the restraining order. The central issue in the appeal was whether the Magistrate erred in deciding that there should be no order for the prosecution to pay the appellant's costs.

The court had to determine whether the Magistrate's decision to not order the prosecution to pay the appellant's costs was justified. The appeal hinged on whether the Magistrate misapplied the law or misunderstood the facts in reaching his decision. The court noted that the Magistrate had considered the public policy implications of discouraging individuals from seeking police assistance when they feel harassed, a factor that must be weighed in the exercise of discretion under s189 of the Summary Procedure Act 1921. The court also identified an error of fact in the Magistrate's reasoning concerning why the complainant had moved from her former address.

The appeal court exercised its discretion afresh, taking into account the history of the case and the public policy considerations. The court concluded that the initial decision to grant the restraining order was justified, but it was ultimately not proceeded with due to the complainant's change of mind. The appeal court confirmed the Magistrate's decision not to order the prosecution to pay the appellant's costs, considering the circumstances and the potential deterrent effect on public policy if such orders were commonly made. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to the costs of the appeal.