SAY v AZ; ex parte Attorney-General
[2006] QCA 524
To print this judgment please return to the case and click on the PDF icon
next to the
case name. For court use, a full PDF copy is required or preferred.
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
Please Note: You are about to print a copy of the onscreen
version of
this judgment. For court use, a full PDF copy of the judgment is required or preferred. Please
return to
the case for PDF printing options.
- Unreported Judgment
- Appeal Determined (QCA)
- SAY v AZ; ex parte Attorney-General[2006] QCA 524
- Add to List
SAY v AZ; ex parte Attorney-General[2006] QCA 524
SAY v AZ; ex parte Attorney-General[2006] QCA 524
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
PARTIES: | |
FILE NO/S: | |
Court of Appeal | |
PROCEEDING: | Application for Leave s 118 DCA (Civil) – Further Order |
ORIGINATING COURT: | |
DELIVERED ON: | Judgment delivered 10 November 2006 Further Order delivered 8 December 2006 |
DELIVERED AT: | Brisbane |
HEARING DATE: | 20 September 2006 |
JUDGES: | Holmes JA, Jones and Mullins JJ Further Order of the Court |
FURTHER ORDER: | The respondent is to be granted an Indemnity Certificate under s 15 Appeals Costs Fund Act 1973 |
CATCHWORDS: | APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL – PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – QUEENSLAND – APPEAL COSTS FUND – POWER TO GRANT INDEMNITY CERTIFICATE – WHEN GRANTED – where the appellant was successful on an appeal in respect of quantum of criminal compensation order – where it was ordered that the respondent pay $42,750 compensation to the appellant, together with her costs of the appeal – whether the respondent should be granted an Indemnity Certificate under s 15 of the Appeals Costs Fund Act 1973 (Qld) Appeals Costs Fund Act 1973 (Qld), s 15, s 15(1), s 16(2) Beardsley v Loogatha [2001] QCA 438; Appeal No 5823 of 2001, 26 October 2001, considered HW v LO [2001] 2 Qd R 415; [2000] QCA 377, considered |
COUNSEL: | A J Kimmins, with R W Frigo, for the applicant No appearance for the respondent K Mellifont, for the Attorney General, as amicus curiae |
SOLICITORS: | HQF Lawyers for the applicant No appearance for the respondent Crown Law for the Attorney-General |
[1] THE COURT: The appellant was successful on an appeal in respect of the quantum of a criminal compensation order. In consequence it was ordered that the respondent pay her compensation of $42,750 together with the costs of the appeal. The appellant seeks also an order granting the respondent an Indemnity Certificate under s 15 of the Appeals Costs Fund Act 1973 (Qld), pointing out that such an order was made in Beardsley v Loogatha [2001] QCA 438.
[2] Beardsley v Loogatha, in turn, applied an approach adopted in HW v LO [2001] 2 Qd R 415 in which the Chief Justice reasoned that, the appellant’s appeal on a question of law having succeeded, the respondent could be taken to have applied for a certificate under s 15(1) of the Appeals Costs Fund Act. Once such a certificate had been granted, the Appeal Costs Board had the power, under s 16(2) of the Act, if it was satisfied that the respondent would not or could not pay the costs ordered to be paid to the appellant, to direct that those costs be paid from the Fund on the respondent’s behalf.
[3] The only point of distinction between the circumstances in HW and those here is that in the present case there has been an application, albeit by the appellant, for an Indemnity Certificate. Given the Court’s preparedness in both HW and Beardsley to order, in similar circumstances, that an Indemnity Certificate issue, there seems no reason not to adopt the same approach here.
[4] The order of the Court is that the respondent be granted an Indemnity Certificate under s 15 Appeals Costs Fund Act 1973.