HC Deb 19 October 1916 vol 86 c724

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in the case of a man in His Majesty's Navy being court-martialled and the charge against him dismissed and the man restored to his former position, the acquittal carries with it the right to have refunded to him the legal expenses incurred in proving his innocence; and, if not, will he explain why?


Legal expenses incurred by an accused person in connection with a naval court-martial, in so far as they consist of expenses of witnesses, are paid by the Crown. The Crown does not pay the expenses of a legal adviser for the accused. The accused does not generally employ a legal adviser, but is assisted by a naval officer. As the prosecutor also is a naval officer, prosecution and defence are on an equal footing, and no reason is seen for providing the accused with a legal adviser at the expense of the State.