Williamson v Hodgson
[2010] WASC 95 (S)
•27 APRIL 2010
WILLIAMSON -v- HODGSON [2010] WASC 95 (S)
| SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA | Citation No: | [2010] WASC 95 (S) | |
| Case No: | SJA:1107/2009 | 27 APRIL 2010 | |
| Coram: | MAZZA J | 27/04/10 | |
| 12/05/10 | |||
| 3 | Judgment Part: | 1 of 1 | |
| Result: | Costs awarded in favour of respondent | ||
| B | |||
| PDF Version |
| Parties: | HARLEY ROBERT WILLIAMSON PAUL RICHARD HODGSON |
Catchwords: | Criminal law Practice and procedure Costs after unsuccessful appeal against the decision of a magistrate Costs granted |
Legislation: | Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), s 14, s 16 |
Case References: | Williamson v Hodgson [2010] WASC 95 |
JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA CITATION : WILLIAMSON -v- HODGSON [2010] WASC 95 (S) CORAM : MAZZA J HEARD : 27 APRIL 2010 DELIVERED : 27 APRIL 2010 SUPPLEMENTARY
DECISION : 12 MAY 2010 FILE NO/S : SJA 1107 of 2009 BETWEEN : HARLEY ROBERT WILLIAMSON
- Appellant
AND
PAUL RICHARD HODGSON
Respondent
ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction : MAGISTRATES COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram : MAGISTRATE P G MALONE
File No : MI 2540 of 2009
Catchwords:
Criminal law - Practice and procedure - Costs after unsuccessful appeal against the decision of a magistrate - Costs granted
(Page 2)
Legislation:
Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), s 14, s 16
Result:
Costs awarded in favour of respondent
Category: B
Representation:
Counsel:
Appellant : In person
Respondent : Ms M J Paterson
Solicitors:
Appellant : In person
Respondent : State Solicitor for Western Australia
Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):
Williamson v Hodgson [2010] WASC 95
(Page 3)
1 MAZZA J: On 27 April 2010, I dismissed the appellant's appeal: Williamson v Hodgson [2010] WASC 95. After I delivered my judgment, the respondent sought an order for costs against the appellant. The application was opposed by the appellant.
2 Section 14(1)(h) of the Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA) (the Act) gives the Supreme Court power to:
Make an order as to the costs of the appeal and the costs of the proceedings in the court of summary jurisdiction.
3 This power must be read subject to s 20 of the Act, which, in general terms, prevents the court from making an order of costs against the Attorney General, Justices of the Peace or police officers. Section 20 has no application to this case.
4 The discretion to award costs is wide. The appeal was unsuccessful. None of the appellant's grounds had any merit. The respondent has been put to considerable expense. I can see no reason why costs should not follow the event. I order that the appellant pay the respondent's costs.
5 In the interests of finality, and as the matter was straightforward, I can see no reason why costs cannot be fixed now by me. Ms Paterson, on behalf of the respondent, claims costs in the sum of $3,500. I have read the respondent's submissions which, I am sure, reflect the considerable time taken to prepare the case. The hearing of the appeal, including the delivery of my reasons, took in the order of three hours.
6 I was told this morning of the amount of time spent by Ms Paterson in preparation of the appeal and her hourly rate. In my opinion, an amount of $3,000 is fair and reasonable. For these reasons, I order that the appellant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal, fixed in the sum of $3,000.
0