||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 341 (Jun)
Rose LJ and Douglas Brown J
||Jonathan Hall (instructed by Gulland & Gulland, Maidstone) for the defendant.
||The respondent did not appear and was not represented.
||26 June 2003
Criminal evidence and procedure - Costs - Award against defendant - Amount - s 18.
When considering making an order for costs under s18 of the the first step was for the justices to determine the propriety of the claim for costs by the prosecution. Having decided what figure would be reasonable for the prosecution to claim, they should then consider, in the light of s18, what sum it would be just and reasonable to order the defendant to pay. In the instant case, the justices could not have properly made such an order given the unchallenged shortfall in the defendant's means and his status as an undischarged bankrupt. They had erred in taking account of periodic payments of the defendant's rent by his father and the voluntary nature of his child maintenance payments (in the sense that they were not a result of proceedings by the Child Support Agency)so as to reduce that shortfall.
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary