The District Court held that a non-party recipient of a subpoena issued at the request of an accused in criminal proceedings is entitled to recover reasonable compliance costs even where the accused disputes the quantum and asserts that compliance without prior tender of adequate conduct money is voluntary and at the recipient's own risk. The Court found it was reasonable for the applicants to comply with the subpoena as narrowed where the accused had not withdrawn the subpoena, the trial was imminent, and the applicants reasonably understood the narrowed scope had been accepted. The Court ordered the accused to pay reasonable compliance expenses, to be assessed by the Supreme Court if not agreed, applying the framework in R v DK and R v Obeid confirming UCPR r 33.11 applies to subpoenas issued by an accused in District Court criminal proceedings via s 171D District Court Act and SCR r 75.3.
The full text is available to signed-in members.