For the purposes of a defendant reclaiming his costs, those costs were incurred where there was a contractual obligation on him to pay, and it was wrong for the court first to insist that he pay them, and then re-imburse him. It was not dependent upon issues about the likelihood of him ever paying. They might not be repayable where no burden was to be placed on the defendant to pay at all. The regulations requiring the payment of costs were inconsistent with the parent Act, and were ultra vires and void.
Magistrates, Costs, Criminal Practice
Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.86399