HC Deb 21 October 1920 vol 133 cc1079-80
67. Mr. DOYLE

asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been called to the case of Mr. Kenefick, who was charged with an offence at the Newcastle-on-Tyne Police Court on 3rd May, convicted, and fined the sum of £10 and costs; whether he is aware that Mr. Kenefick appealed against the decision at the next Quarter Sessions held on 9th July, and that the appeal was upheld, the Judge stating that he left the court without a stain on his character; whether, notwithstanding his being proved innocent, he was obliged to pay the costs of the appeal, amounting to £95; and whether, in view of such a miscarriage of justice, he will take any steps to amend the law as to payment of costs in such cases?

Mr. SHORTT

The allowance of costs to a successful appellant to quarter sessions is a matter for the discretion of the court, and I do not see my way to propose any amendment of the law in this respect.

Mr. DOYLE

Is it a fact that under the existing law a prisoner may be convicted in court and fined, but on appeal the appeal may be sustained, while at the same time the appellant is obliged to pay his costs at the discretion of the judge, which in many cases means the ruin of a poor man? If that is so, is there any fund from which recompense can be obtained? If there is no such fund, will the right hon. Gentleman put the matter before the Government with a view to a change of the law?

Mr. SHORTT

The judge, of course, has full discretion to deprive a successful appellant of his costs, if he sees fit to do so. There is no fund available in such cases.

Mr. LAWSON

Does not this injure a large number of poor people and pre- vent them from having the benefit of British law? Is it not necessary to find some new method?

Mr. SHORTT

I do not think there is a large number of cases like this. It rarely happens that there are circumstances in the case which induce a judge to deprive a successful appellant of his costs. If there has been previous misconduct on the part of the appellant the judge may deprive him of costs, but not in the case of a merely technical reversal of a verdict.

Mr. LAWSON

Would it not be an improvement on the present system to make sure that if a man goes to that extent he receives his costs?

Mr. SHORTT

No. The fact that the judge has discretion to deprive a successful appellant of costs need not prevent any honest and innocent man from appealing. I agree that the cost of proceedings in every case might be lessened.