Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Partial costs awarded following refusal of additional access to court audio recordings
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The Supreme Court allowed an appeal against a High Court decision, finding that the High Court had jurisdiction to hear an application for access to digital audio recordings of criminal proceedings by a third party. However, the Supreme Court refused to grant any additional access to the recordings, upholding the earlier order of the Circuit Court. The main issue for determination in this judgment concerned legal costs: the appellant, having partially succeeded in clarifying access rights, was awarded 30% of his costs for the substantive appeal due to limited success in establishing a right to appeal, but was not awarded full costs as the case did not meet the threshold for exceptional public importance. The Court declined to base the award on legal aid scales or to award costs for the application concerning costs itself.
Digital Audio Recording (DAR) – application for access to court recordings – costs of appeal – partial success – jurisdiction of High Court – Supreme Court Legal Assistance/Legal Representation Scheme – public interest proceedings – proportionality of costs – affirmation of Circuit Court order – interests of justice – open justice – Rules of the Superior Courts (RSC) – exercise of judicial discretion in costs – precedent on costs in public interest cases – refusal of full costs
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
