{"id":"tas:act-1976-107","name":"Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1976","slug":"costs-in-criminal-cases-act-1976","collection":"act","jurisdiction":"tas","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":"107 of 1976","makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":110155,"registerId":"tas-act-1976-107-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-03","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Short title and commencement","content":"### 1 Short title and commencement\n\n> > (1)  This Act may be cited as the [Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1976](/view/html/inforce/2026-04-12/act-1976-107) .\n> \n> > (2)  This Act shall commence on a date to be fixed by proclamation.","sortOrder":0},{"sectionNumber":"2","sectionType":"section","heading":"Interpretation","content":"### 2 Interpretation\n\n> In this Act, unless the contrary intention appears –\n> \n> > ***costs*** means expenses properly incurred by a defendant but does not include any expenses incurred by the State, Commonwealth, or any other body by way of legal aid to the defendant;\n> \n> > ***defendant*** means any person charged with an offence;\n> \n> > ***public officer*** means any person employed in any capacity in the public service of the State, and includes –\n> > \n> > > > (a) a police officer; and\n> > > \n> > > > (b) a probation officer;\n> \n> > ***State authority*** means any person or body of persons, whether incorporate or unincorporate, constituted, or established by or under any Act, or appointed by the Governor under the authority of any Act, to administer or control any department, business, or undertaking on behalf of the State.","sortOrder":1},{"sectionNumber":"3","sectionType":"section","heading":"Act to bind the Crown","content":"### 3 Act to bind the Crown\n\n> This Act binds the Crown.","sortOrder":2},{"sectionNumber":"4","sectionType":"section","heading":"Costs of successful defendant","content":"### 4 Costs of successful defendant\n\n> > (1)  Subject to this Act, where a person having been charged with an offence is discharged from the proceedings in respect thereof, that is to say, where –\n> > \n> > > > (a) he is acquitted of the offence;\n> > > \n> > > > (b) the complaint charging him with the offence is dismissed or withdrawn; or\n> > > \n> > > > (c) he is discharged upon an indictment for the offence –\n> > \n> > the court having the conduct of the proceedings may, upon the application of the defendant, order that he be paid in respect of his defence such costs as it thinks just and reasonable.\n> \n> > (2)  The court, in deciding whether to grant costs and the amount of any costs granted, shall have regard to all relevant circumstances and in particular to the following:\n> > \n> > > > (a) Whether the proceedings were brought and continued in good faith;\n> > > \n> > > > (b) Whether proper steps were taken to investigate any matter coming to, or within, the knowledge of any person responsible for bringing or continuing the proceedings;\n> > > \n> > > > (c) Whether the investigation into the offence was conducted in a reasonable and proper manner;\n> > > \n> > > > (d) Whether the evidence as a whole would support a finding of guilt but the defendant is discharged from the proceedings on a technical point;\n> > > \n> > > > (e) Whether the defendant is discharged from the proceedings because he established (either by the evidence of witnesses called by him or by cross examination of witnesses for the prosecution or otherwise) that he was not guilty.\n> \n> > (3)  No defendant shall be granted costs by reason only of the fact that he is acquitted of an offence, the complaint charging him with an offence is dismissed or withdrawn, or he is discharged upon an indictment.\n> \n> > (4)  No defendant shall be refused costs by reason only of the fact that the proceedings were properly brought and continued.\n> \n> > (5)  No defendant shall be refused costs by reason only of the fact that in the investigation of the offence with which he had been charged he remained silent or refused to assist in respect thereof.","sortOrder":3},{"sectionNumber":"5","sectionType":"section","heading":"Costs of convicted defendant","content":"### 5 Costs of convicted defendant\n\n> *\\[Section 5A Inserted by No. 17 of 1988, s. 3 \\]*Where a defendant is convicted but the court is of the opinion that the charge involved a difficult or important point of law and that in the special circumstances of the case it is proper that he should receive costs in respect of the arguing of that point of law, the court may order that he be paid such costs as it thinks just and reasonable.","sortOrder":4},{"sectionNumber":"5A","sectionType":"section","heading":"Amount of costs","content":"### 5A Amount of costs\n\n> > (1)  In determining the amount of costs to be granted in an order made under [section 4](#GS4@EN) or [5](#GS5@EN) that is just and reasonable, the court may have regard to any scale of costs, fees, or expenses prescribed or agreed upon under any enactment.\n> \n> > (2)  Where, in an order made under [section 4](#GS4@EN) or [5](#GS5@EN) , the court has regard to any scale of costs, fees, or expenses prescribed or agreed upon under any enactment, it shall specify in the order that scale.\n> \n> > (3)  The Registrar of the Supreme Court or the Clerk of the Petty Sessions, as the case may be, shall, if directed by the Court to do so, tax any costs granted by the court under this Act.\n> \n> > (4)  Any taxation of costs made pursuant to [subsection (3)](#GS5A@Gs3@EN) may be subject to review by the magistrate or judge presiding in the proceedings in respect of which the costs are granted.","sortOrder":5},{"sectionNumber":"6","sectionType":"section","heading":"Payment of costs","content":"### 6 Payment of costs\n\n> *\\[Section 6 Amended by No. 51 of 1985, Sched. 2 \\]**\\[Section 6 Amended by No. 5 of 1990, Sched. 1 \\]*\n> \n> > (1)  *\\[Section 6 Subsection (1) amended by No. 17 of 1988, s. 4 \\]*Where any order is made under [section 4](#GS4@EN) or [section 5](#GS5@EN) , the court shall deliver or cause to be delivered a copy of the order –\n> > \n> > > > (a) in the case of any proceedings on indictment or where the complaint is made by public officer, to the Secretary of the Department;\n> > > \n> > > > (b) where the complaint is made by or on behalf of a State authority, to that authority;\n> > > \n> > > > (c) where the complaint is made by or on behalf of a municipal corporation, to that corporation; and\n> > > \n> > > > (d) in any other case, to the complainant.\n> \n> > (2)  *\\[Section 6 Subsection (2) amended by No. 17 of 1988, s. 4 \\]*An order referred to in [subsection (1)](#GS6@Gs1@EN) is enforceable in a court of competent jurisdiction as a judgment of that court.","sortOrder":6},{"sectionNumber":"7","sectionType":"section","heading":"Regulations","content":"### 7 Regulations\n\n> > (1)  The Governor may make regulations for the purpose of this Act.\n> \n> > (2)  *\\[Section 7 Subsection (2) omitted by No. 17 of 1988, s. 5 \\]*.  .  .  .  .  .  .  .","sortOrder":7},{"sectionNumber":"8.","sectionType":"section","heading":null,"content":"### 8.\n\n[Justices Act 1959](/view/html/inforce/2026-04-12/act-1959-077)","sortOrder":8},{"sectionNumber":"9","sectionType":"section","heading":"Application of Act to acquittals, &c., on or after 1st July 1976","content":"### 9 Application of Act to acquittals, &c., on or after 1st July 1976\n\n> Where, before the commencement of this Act and on or after 1st July 1976, any person having been charged with an offence was discharged from the proceedings in respect thereof as mentioned in [section 4](#GS4@EN) [(1)](#GS4@Gs1@EN) , a court having a like jurisdiction as the court by which he was so discharged may, upon the application of that person, make such an order as to costs in respect of his defence as could have been made under this Act had it been in force when he was discharged from the proceedings.","sortOrder":9}],"analysis":{"issue_detection":{"absurdities":[],"contradictions":[]},"summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"Based on the available information, the Act appears to have retained its original scope since 1976. The minimal amendment history (version current from 1 February 1997 with no indication of major changes) suggests the legislation has not materially expanded or contracted from its original intent of regulating costs orders in Tasmanian criminal proceedings."},"complexity_factors":["Limited substantive content was provided — only metadata and status information, not the actual operative provisions of the Act","The subject matter (costs in criminal proceedings) involves judicial discretion, which can be complex in practice","Interaction with broader criminal procedure rules and court hierarchies adds some complexity","Long-standing legislation with minimal amendments suggests relatively stable and simple framework","Tasmanian-specific application limits cross-jurisdictional complexity"],"plain_english_summary":"## Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1976 (Tasmania)\n\nThis Tasmanian law deals with **who pays legal costs when criminal cases are decided** — essentially, when can a court order the government to pay a defendant's legal costs, or order a defendant to pay the prosecution's costs?\n\n### Who does this affect?\n- **People charged with criminal offences** in Tasmania who are acquitted (found not guilty) or have charges dropped — they may be able to recover some of their legal costs\n- **Prosecutors** (usually the Crown/government) who may seek costs if a defendant is convicted\n- **Lawyers** representing clients in Tasmanian criminal proceedings\n\n### Why does it matter?\nCriminal prosecutions can be extraordinarily expensive. Without this law, people who are wrongly charged and ultimately cleared could be left paying thousands of dollars in legal fees with no recourse. This Act gives courts the power to make fairer outcomes by shifting legal costs when justice requires it.\n\n### Key points to know:\n- Courts have **discretion** (choice) about whether to award costs — it is not automatic\n- The law applies to Tasmanian criminal courts\n- It has been in operation since 1976 with minimal amendment, suggesting it has remained relatively stable and uncontroversial\n\n> **Note:** The full text of the Act's substantive provisions was not included in this extract — only status and administrative information was provided. This summary is based on the Act's title, jurisdiction, and general legal context."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":5,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"Section 9 extends the Act’s application to persons who were discharged from proceedings on or after 1 July 1976 even if their discharge occurred before the Act commenced. That gives the Act retrospective effect for that defined earlier period, expanding temporal scope beyond a purely prospective application (see section 9)."},"complexity_factors":["Judicial discretion to award \"such costs as it thinks just and reasonable\" (section 4(1)) creates case-by-case uncertainty.","Detailed list of factors courts must have regard to when deciding awards (section 4(2)) requiring factual and procedural assessment.","Exclusion of legal aid from recoverable costs narrows recovery and requires determining what counts as publicly funded assistance (section 2).","Procedural routing for payment orders differs by type of complainant and may involve different public bodies (section 6(1)).","Mechanics for fixing amounts include reference to external scales, mandatory specification of the scale if used, taxation by court officers, and review by presiding judicial officer (section 5A(1)-(4)).","Retrospective application to discharges on or after a specified past date adds temporal complexity (section 9).","Binding the Crown (section 3) interacts with public finance and enforcement law, affecting who practically pays.","Separate, narrow provision for costs for convicted defendants dependent on legal‑law questions (section 5) adds a specialized pathway."],"plain_english_summary":"What this law does, mechanically\n\n- Gives courts power to order payment of a defendant's legal costs when the defendant is discharged, acquitted, or has a complaint dismissed or withdrawn (see section 4(1)).\n- Sets out who counts as a defendant and what \"costs\" means: costs are expenses properly incurred by the defendant but do not include legal aid paid by the State or other bodies (section 2, definition of \"costs\").\n- Requires the court to consider specified factors when deciding whether to award costs and how much to award (section 4(2)). The listed factors include whether proceedings were brought and continued in good faith, whether investigations were properly carried out, whether the evidence would support guilt but the defendant was discharged on a technicality, and whether the defendant established innocence by evidence or cross‑examination.\n- Stops a court from awarding costs solely because a defendant was acquitted or discharged (section 4(3)), but also stops a court from refusing costs solely because the prosecution was properly brought and continued (section 4(4)) or because the defendant remained silent in the investigation (section 4(5)).\n- Allows a court, in a limited circumstance, to order costs for a convicted defendant where the conviction involved a difficult or important point of law and special circumstances make an award appropriate (section 5).\n- Gives the court guidance on how to set amounts: it may have regard to any prescribed or agreed scale of costs or fees (section 5A(1)); if it relies on a scale it must specify that scale in the order (section 5A(2)). The court may direct the Registrar or Clerk to tax the costs (section 5A(3)), and any such taxation may be reviewed by the presiding magistrate or judge (section 5A(4)).\n- Requires the court to deliver a copy of any costs order to particular recipients depending on who brought the complaint (for example, to the Secretary of the relevant Department where the complaint was made by a public officer, or to a State authority where that authority brought the complaint) (section 6(1)). Orders are enforceable as judgments (section 6(2)).\n- Binds the Crown (section 3), and allows the Governor to make regulations for the Act (section 7).\n- Applies to discharges that occurred on or after 1 July 1976 even if they happened before the Act commenced, by allowing a court with like jurisdiction to make orders as if the Act had been in force when the person was discharged (section 9).\n\nWho pays, who decides, and what changes in behaviour\n\n- Who decides: the court hearing the criminal proceedings decides whether to award costs and how much, exercising a judicial discretion to order what it considers \"just and reasonable\" (sections 4(1), 5A(1)). Section 5 gives a similar discretionary power where a defendant is convicted on a difficult point of law.\n- Who pays / who receives the order: the Act requires the court to deliver the order to the appropriate recipient depending on who prosecuted (for example, the Secretary of the Department if a public officer prosecuted, or the State authority if it prosecuted) (section 6(1)). Because the Act binds the Crown (section 3) and the order is enforceable as a judgment (section 6(2)), public bodies can be the practical payor where they initiated the prosecution. Where a private complainant initiated the proceedings, the order is delivered to that complainant (section 6(1)(d)), which creates a direct payment obligation enforceable as a judgment (section 6(2)).\n- What behaviour this changes: the Act conditions awards on the conduct of prosecutions and investigations by listing considerations the court must weigh (section 4(2)). That creates an institutional incentive for prosecutors and investigators to document and act reasonably (to avoid factor findings that could favor an award). Courts retain broad discretion, so outcomes depend on judicial assessment of those factors.\n\nConstraints, compliance burden and administrative mechanics\n\n- Legal aid exclusion: costs do not include legal aid paid by the State or other bodies (section 2, definition of \"costs\"). That means defendants cannot recover from the prosecutor or State the value of publicly funded legal aid.\n- Judicial discretion and uncertainty: awards require the court to find what is \"just and reasonable\" after weighing multiple factors (sections 4(1)–(2)). That entails case-by-case judicial assessment rather than fixed entitlement.\n- Administrative tasks and review path: if the court refers the amount to taxation, the Registrar or Clerk must tax the costs when directed (section 5A(3)), and that taxation can be reviewed by the presiding magistrate or judge (section 5A(4)).\n- Enforcement route: costs orders are required to be delivered to specified recipients (section 6(1)) and are enforceable as judgments (section 6(2)), which provides a clear legal mechanism for collection.\n\nTrade-offs, incentives and potential effects to note (mechanisms, not value judgments)\n\n- Concentrated benefits and concentrated costs: successful defendants (a concentrated group) can receive direct monetary awards; the practical payor is often a public body when the prosecution is by a public officer or State authority (sections 6(1) and 3). That concentrates cost onto government budgets in those cases.\n- Limits on recovery of public legal aid: because legal aid paid to a defendant is excluded from the meaning of \"costs,\" the State’s legal aid outlays are not recoverable by defendants (section 2). This reduces the financial transfer from public payer to defendant even when an acquittal occurs.\n- Incentives for prosecutors and investigators: the court must consider the quality of investigation and whether proceedings were brought and continued in good faith (section 4(2)(a)–(c)). Those requirements create a legal mechanism by which poorly investigated or improperly continued prosecutions can weigh toward an award of costs.\n- Narrow relief for convicted defendants: the Act permits costs for a convicted defendant only in narrowly defined circumstances (difficult or important point of law and special circumstances) (section 5). This limits awards against prosecutors for ordinary convictions.\n- Temporal scope extension: the Act allows courts to make costs orders for discharges on or after 1 July 1976 even if the discharge occurred before the Act commenced (section 9). That extends the Act’s reach to a defined prior period.\n\nKey sections to consult quickly: definitions and exclusions (section 2); discretionary award and factors (section 4); limited award for convicted defendants (section 5); how amounts are fixed and taxed (section 5A); delivery and enforceability of orders (section 6); retroactive application to discharges on/after 1 July 1976 (section 9)."},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The legislation remains focused on its original purpose: providing a mechanism for awarding costs to successful defendants in criminal proceedings. The amendments noted (1985, 1988, 1990) appear to be technical or procedural updates (payment mechanisms, cost taxation, insertion of s 5A) rather than expansion of substantive scope. Section 5 (costs for convicted defendants on difficult points of law) was added in 1988 but represents a logical extension of the cost-awarding framework rather than mission creep."},"complexity_factors":["Only 4 defined terms in the interpretation section (costs, defendant, public officer, State authority)","Straightforward conditional structure: if defendant discharged under specific circumstances (s 4(1)), then court may award costs (s 4(1)), subject to specific considerations (s 4(2))","Limited cross-referencing: only internal references to sections 4, 5, and 5A","Simple administrative provisions for payment delivery (s 6) and taxation of costs (s 5A(3)-(4))","Single exception for convicted defendants (s 5) with narrow scope (difficult/important point of law)","No nested exceptions or complex deeming provisions","Total length: approximately 9 sections with minimal amendments noted"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this law does:**\n\nThis Act allows people who have been charged with a crime but then cleared (acquitted, had charges dropped, or discharged) to apply to the court to have their legal costs paid back to them. It also allows convicted defendants to get costs in rare cases where they raised a difficult or important legal point.\n\n**Who it affects:**\n\n*   **Defendants** — people accused of crimes who successfully defend themselves or have charges withdrawn.\n*   **Public officers and State authorities** — police, government departments, and other public bodies that bring prosecutions (they may have to pay the defendant's costs if ordered).\n*   **Courts** — magistrates and judges who decide whether to award costs and how much.\n\n**Key points:**\n\n*   **Not automatic:** Being found \"not guilty\" does **not** automatically mean you get your money back. The court looks at whether the prosecution was brought in good faith, whether investigations were proper, and whether the defendant actually proved innocence or just got off on a technicality.\n*   **Who pays:** If costs are awarded against a government prosecutor, the relevant government department pays. If a private person laid the complaint, they pay.\n*   **Convicted defendants rarely get costs:** Only if they raised a genuinely difficult legal question and the court thinks it's fair they be compensated for arguing that point.\n*   **Backdated:** The law also applies to people cleared between 1 July 1976 and when the Act actually started.\n\n**Why it matters:**\n\nBeing accused of a crime is expensive. This law provides a safety net so that innocent people aren't left thousands of dollars out of pocket after successfully defending themselves. However, it balances this against the public interest in allowing prosecutors to bring cases without fear of automatic penalties if they lose."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/costs-in-criminal-cases-act-1976","history":"/api/acts/costs-in-criminal-cases-act-1976/history","analysis":"/api/acts/costs-in-criminal-cases-act-1976/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/costs-in-criminal-cases-act-1976/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/costs-in-criminal-cases-act-1976/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/costs-in-criminal-cases-act-1976/documents"}}