Mohammadi v Bethune

[2018] WASCA 98

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Costs
3. › Accused's costs in summary proceedings
4. › Indictable offence with summary conviction penalty
5. › Either way charge dismissed for want of prosecution after plea entered
6. › Whether accused 'successful' for purposes of costs entitlement
7. › Official Prosecutions (Accused's Costs) Act 1973 (WA), s 4(2)(c)
8. › Criminal Code (WA), s 5
1. Statutory Interpretation
2. › Construction of statutory provision
3. › Text, context and purpose
4. › Words after dash as temporal limitation
5. › Whether words 'before the summary court decides' refer to period ending when decision no longer possible
6. › Coherence with statutory scheme as a whole
7. › Avoiding construction that renders words otiose
8. › Official Prosecutions (Accused's Costs) Act 1973 (WA), s 4(2)(c)(i)

Quick Take

An accused charged with an 'either way' indictable offence in Western Australia is entitled to costs under the OPAC Act if the charge is dismissed for want of prosecution at a stage when the charge must be tried summarily (i.e., after the accused has pleaded or after a s 5 application has been refused). The construction in Carcione v Robson, which denied costs in all such cases, is no longer good law.