A costs order had been made against the prosecution, who now appealed.
Held: It was necessary to look at the relevant decisions at the point the proceedings were instituted rather than applying a level of knowledge gathered later: ‘With the greatest respect to the Magistrates, one has to say that there is a substantial degree of hindsight in that judgment. Looking at the matter in advance, as prosecutors have to, there was clearly a serious question to be discussed, and properly brought before the Magistrates. In my judgment, had the Magistrates considered that aspect of the case, and considered the prosecutor’s position before the case was brought, they could not have concluded that the prosecution had been an improper one in terms of the guidance given by Nolan LJ in DPP v Denning.’
Judges:
Buxton J
Citations:
[1994] 159 JP 390
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Approved – Director of Public Prosecutions v Denning 1991
Nolan LJ considered the test for whether proceedings had been begiun ‘unnecessarily or improperly’so as to decide the question of costs awards in Magistrates proceedings, saying: ‘I would add in this connection that the word ‘improper’ in this . .
Cited by:
Cited – Bentley-Thomas v Winkfield Parish Council Admn 5-Feb-2013
The appellant challenged an order to pay over andpound;18,000 costs after losing her complaint of statutory nuisance against the Parish Council. She had complained as to the noise coming from a playground.
Held: She had brought the proceedings . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice, Costs
Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.510705
