{"id":"official-prosecutions-accuseds-costs-act-1973","name":"Official Prosecutions (Accused's Costs) Act 1973","slug":"official-prosecutions-accused-s-costs-act-1973","collection":"act","jurisdiction":"wa","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":105884,"registerId":"wa-official-prosecutions-accuseds-costs-act-1973-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-03","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Official Prosecutions (Accused's Costs) Act 1973","content":"![Crest]()Western Australia\n\nOfficial Prosecutions (Accused’s Costs) Act 1973\n\nWestern Australia\n\nOfficial Prosecutions (Accused’s Costs) Act 1973\n\nContents\n\n1. Short title 1\n\n2. Commencement 1\n\n3. Application 1\n\n4. Interpretation 2\n\n5. Successful accused entitled to costs 3\n\n6. Court may revoke or reduce accused’s entitlement to costs 4\n\n7. Partly successful accused may be awarded costs 5\n\n8. Question of costs may be adjourned to chambers 5\n\n9. Payment of costs ordered 5\n\nNotes\n\nCompilation table 7\n\nOther notes 8\n\nDefined terms\n\n  \n\nWestern Australia\n\nOfficial Prosecutions (Accused’s Costs) Act 1973\n\nAn Act to amend the law relating to the payment of costs to accused persons in official prosecutions and for incidental purposes.\n\n[Long title amended: No. 2 of 2008 s. 67.]\n\n##### 1. Short title\n\nThis Act may be cited as the *Official Prosecutions (Accused’s Costs) Act 1973*.\n\n[Section 1 amended: No. 84 of 2004 s. 82.]\n\n##### 2. Commencement\n\nThis Act shall come into operation on a date to be fixed by proclamation.\n\n##### 3. Application\n\n(1) Except as otherwise provided by this section, this Act applies notwithstanding the provisions of or under any other Act, or of or under any rule of court practice.\n\n(2) To the extent of any inconsistency between a provision of this Act and a provision of or under any other Act, or of or under any rule of court practice, the provision which is more favourable to the accused prevails.\n\n(3) This Act binds the Crown.\n\n[Section 3 amended: No. 84 of 2004 s. 82.]\n\n##### 4. Interpretation\n\n(1) In this Act unless the contrary intention appears —\n\n  accused means a person charged with an offence in an official prosecution;\n\n  appeal means an appeal against a decision of a summary court given in an official prosecution;\n\n  appeal court means a court hearing an appeal against a decision of a summary court given in an official prosecution;\n\n  costs means any expenses that —\n\n(a) are properly incurred by an accused in an official prosecution; and\n\n(b) are due and payable, or paid, by the accused to another person or as court fees;\n\n  court includes a summary court and an appeal court;\n\n  official prosecution means proceedings in a summary court against a person charged with an offence by a public official acting or purporting to act by virtue of his office, and includes proceedings on appeal therefrom;\n\n  public official means a Minister of the Crown, a person employed in the Public Service of the State, a member of the Police Force, or a person employed by a local government or any other statutory body and includes any person acting as agent of or under the instructions of such a person or body;\n\n  section means a section of this Act; and\n\n  summary court means the Magistrates Court or the Children’s Court.\n\n(2) An accused —\n\n(a) subject to paragraph (c), is successful if —\n\n(i) he is acquitted of the charge, other than on account of mental impairment;\n\n(ii) he is discharged from the charge under section 128(2) or (3) of the *Criminal Procedure Act 2004*;\n\n(iii) the charge is dismissed for want of prosecution; or\n\n(iv) his conviction of the charge is set aside;\n\n(b) is partly successful if —\n\n(i) he is convicted of a lesser offence than that with which he was charged; or\n\n(ii) he is charged with several offences in the one prosecution notice and is successful in respect of one or some of them;\n\n(c) is not successful if the charge is of an indictable offence and is dismissed for want of prosecution by the summary court —\n\n(i) if section 5 of *The Criminal Code* applies to the charge — before the summary court decides under that section that the charge is to be tried on indictment; or\n\n(ii) otherwise — before the summary court commits him for trial or sentence on the charge.\n\n[Section 4 amended: No. 49 of 1988 s. 55; No. 14 of 1996 s. 4; No. 59 of 2004 s. 141; No. 84 of 2004 s. 56, 80, 82 and 86; No. 10 of 2023 s. 412.]\n\n##### 5. Successful accused entitled to costs\n\n(1) Subject to this Act, a successful accused is entitled to his costs.\n\n(2) Where an accused is successful by reason of a decision of the summary court only, the summary court shall make an order as to the amount of his costs therein but the accused is not entitled to those costs unless and until the time for appeal therefrom has expired or an appeal therefrom is resolved in his favour.\n\n(3) Where an accused is successful by reason of a decision of the appeal court, the appeal court shall make an order as to the amount of his costs in the appeal court.\n\n(4) Where an accused is successful by reason of the appeal court reversing a decision of the summary court, the appeal court shall make an order as to the amount of the costs in the appeal court and in the summary court.\n\n(5) The amount of costs ordered, other than court fees, shall be in accordance with the scale fixed from time to time by a legal costs determination made under the *Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2022* section 133.\n\n[Section 5 amended: No. 29 of 1997 s. 4; No. 65 of 2003 s. 54; No. 84 of 2004 s. 82; No. 21 of 2008 s. 686; No. 9 of 2022 s. 424.]\n\n##### 6. Court may revoke or reduce accused’s entitlement to costs\n\nThe court may order that a successful accused is not entitled to his costs or part thereof if —\n\n(a) the court, having found the accused guilty, disposes of the charge without recording a conviction;\n\n(b) he has done or caused to be done or has omitted or caused to be omitted something (other than an act or omission the subject of the charge) which was unreasonable in the circumstances and which contributed to the institution or continuation of the proceedings; or\n\n(c) he has done or caused to be done or has omitted or caused to be omitted something during the course of proceedings or in the conduct of the defence or appeal calculated to prolong the proceedings unnecessarily or cause unnecessary expense.\n\n[Section 6 amended: No. 7 of 1974 s. 3; No. 49 of 1988 s. 56; No. 15 of 1991 s. 21; No. 78 of 1995 s. 96; No. 84 of 2004 s. 82.]\n\n##### 7. Partly successful accused may be awarded costs\n\n(1) Subject to this Act, where a partly successful accused satisfies the court that he incurred additional costs by reason of being charged with an offence or offences in respect of which he was successful, the court may order that he is entitled to those costs.\n\n(2) Before exercising the discretion conferred by subsection (1), the court may have regard to any of the circumstances referred to in paragraphs (a) to (c) inclusive of section 6 that exist in the case of the partly successful accused.\n\n(3) Where the court makes an order pursuant to subsection (1), subsections (2) to (5) inclusive of section 5 apply to and in relation to the order with such modifications as are necessary.\n\n[Section 7 amended: No. 84 of 2004 s. 82.]\n\n##### 8. Question of costs may be adjourned to chambers\n\nThe court may adjourn to chambers the question of costs, or the amount thereof, under this Act to enable the making of submissions and the tendering of evidence, including affidavit evidence, on that question.\n\n##### 9. Payment of costs ordered\n\nWhere costs are ordered under this Act —\n\n(a) if the public official a party to the proceedings is a Minister of the Crown, a person employed in the Public Service of the State, a member of the Police Force, or any other person acting as agent of or under the instructions of such a person, the Clerk or Registrar, as the case requires, of the court shall give to the accused a certificate signed by the Clerk or sealed with the Seal of the court, as the case requires, showing the amount of the costs ordered and on production of the certificate to the Treasurer, the accused shall be paid such costs out of the Consolidated Account; or\n\n(b) if the public official a party to the proceedings is a person employed by a local government or any other statutory body, or is any other person acting as agent of or under the instructions of such a person or body, the costs shall be ordered against that body and shall be paid by it to the accused, and shall be recoverable as a civil debt.\n\n[Section 9 amended: No. 6 of 1993 s. 13; No. 14 of 1996 s. 4; No. 84 of 2004 s. 82; No. 77 of 2006 s. 4.]\n\n[**10.** Deleted: No. 65 of 1987 s. 41.]\n\n![]()\n\nNotes\n\nThis is a compilation of the *Official Prosecutions (Accused’s Costs) Act 1973* and includes amendments made by other written laws. For provisions that have come into operation, and for information about any reprints, see the compilation table.\n\nCompilation table\n\n| **Short title** | **Number and year** | **Assent** | **Commencement** |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| *Official Prosecutions (Defendants’ Costs) Act 1973* 1 | 46 of 1973 | 6 Nov 1973 | 25 Jan 1974 (see s. 2 and *Gazette* 25 Jan 1974 p. 179) |\n| *Official Prosecutions (Defendants’ Costs) Act Amendment Act 1974* | 7 of 1974 | 19 Sep 1974 | 8 Nov 1974 (see s. 2 and *Gazette* 8 Nov 1974 p. 4973) |\n| **Reprint of the *Official Prosecutions (Defendants’ Costs) Act 1973* approved 23 May 1983** (includes amendments listed above) | | | |\n| *Acts Amendment (Legal Practitioners Costs and Taxation) Act 1987* Pt. XIV | 65 of 1987 | 1 Dec 1987 | 12 Feb 1988 (see s. 2(2) and *Gazette* 12 Feb 1988 p. 397) |\n| *Acts Amendment (Children’s Court) Act 1988* Pt. 8 | 49 of 1988 | 22 Dec 1988 | 1 Dec 1989 (see s. 2 and *Gazette* 24 Nov 1989 p. 4327) |\n| *Children’s Court of Western Australia Amendment Act (No. 2) 1991* s. 21 | 15 of 1991 | 21 Jun 1991 | 9 Aug 1991 (see s. 2(2) and *Gazette* 9 Aug 1991 p. 4101) |\n| *Financial Administration Legislation Amendment Act 1993* s. 13 | 6 of 1993 | 27 Aug 1993 | 1 Jul 1993 (see s. 2(1)) |\n| *Sentencing (Consequential Provisions) Act 1995* Pt. 57 | 78 of 1995 | 16 Jan 1996 | 4 Nov 1996 (see s. 2 and *Gazette* 25 Oct 1996 p. 5632) |\n| *Local Government (Consequential Amendments) Act 1996* s. 4 | 14 of 1996 | 28 Jun 1996 | 1 Jul 1996 (see s. 2) |\n| *Acts Amendment (Legal Costs) Act 1997* Pt. 3 | 29 of 1997 | 26 Sep 1997 | 26 Sep 1997 (see s. 2) |\n| **Reprint of the *Official Prosecutions (Defendants’ Costs) Act 1973* as at 19 Feb 1999** (includes amendments listed above) | | | |\n| *Acts Amendment and Repeal (Courts and Legal Practice) Act 2003* s. 54 | 65 of 2003 | 4 Dec 2003 | 1 Jan 2004 (see s. 2 and *Gazette* 30 Dec 2003 p. 5722) |\n| *Courts Legislation Amendment and Repeal Act 2004* s. 141 | 59 of 2004 | 23 Nov 2004 | 1 May 2005 (see s. 2 and *Gazette* 31 Dec 2004 p. 7128) |\n| *Criminal Procedure and Appeals (Consequential and Other Provisions) Act 2004* Pt. 12, s. 80, 82 and 86 | 84 of 2004 | 16 Dec 2004 | 2 May 2005 (see s. 2 and *Gazette* 31 Dec 2004 p. 7129 (correction in *Gazette* 7 Jan 2005 p. 53)) |\n| **Reprint 3: The *Official Prosecutions (Accused’s Costs) Act 1973* as at 3 Feb 2006** (includes amendments listed above) | | | |\n| *Financial Legislation Amendment and Repeal Act 2006* s. 4 | 77 of 2006 | 21 Dec 2006 | 1 Feb 2007 (see s. 2 and *Gazette* 19 Jan 2007 p. 137) |\n| *Criminal Law and Evidence Amendment Act 2008* s. 67 | 2 of 2008 | 12 Mar 2008 | 27 Apr 2008 (see s. 2 and *Gazette* 24 Apr 2008 p. 1559) |\n| *Legal Profession Act 2008* s. 686 | 21 of 2008 | 27 May 2008 | 1 Mar 2009 (see s. 2(b) and *Gazette* 27 Feb 2009 p. 511) |\n| *Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2022* s. 424 | 9 of 2022 | 14 Apr 2022 | 1 Jul 2022 (see s. 2(c) and SL 2022/113 cl. 2) |\n| *Criminal Law (Mental Impairment) Act 2023* s. 412 | 10 of 2023 | 13 Apr 2023 | 1 Sep 2024 (see s. 2(b) and SL 2024/175 cl. 2) |\n\n\nOther notes\n\n1 Now known as the *Official Prosecutions (Accused’s Costs) Act 1973*; short title changed (see note under s. 1).\n\nDefined terms\n\n*[This is a list of terms defined and the provisions where they are defined. The list is not part of the law.]*\n\n**Defined term Provision(s)**\n\naccused 4(1)\n\nappeal 4(1)\n\nappeal court 4(1)\n\ncosts 4(1)\n\ncourt 4(1)\n\nofficial prosecution 4(1)\n\npublic official 4(1)\n\nsection 4(1)\n\nsummary court 4(1)\n\n© State of Western Australia 2024.\n\nThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence (CC BY 4.0). To view relevant information and for a link to a copy of the licence, visit www.legislation.wa.gov.au.\n\nAttribute work as: © State of Western Australia 2024.\n\nBy Authority: GEOFF O. LAWN, Government Printer\n","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"summary":{"complexity_score":1,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"Scope cannot be assessed as the legislative text was not retrievable. The page on the WA legislation website returned a system error indicating the URL has changed due to site upgrades. No comparison between original intent and current provisions is possible."},"complexity_factors":["Legislation text was entirely unavailable — only a broken page notice was retrieved","No provisions, definitions, schedules, or operative clauses could be assessed","Complexity score reflects absence of content, not simplicity of the underlying law","The actual Act may score significantly higher on complexity if its text were available"],"plain_english_summary":"## ⚠️ Content Unavailable\n\nThe actual text of the **Official Prosecutions (Accused's Costs) Act 1973** (Western Australia) could not be retrieved — the source page is no longer accessible on the WA legislation website.\n\n**What we do know from the title:**\nThis is a Western Australian law from 1973 that deals with **costs (legal expenses) awarded to accused persons** in official prosecutions (meaning criminal cases brought by the government or public authorities). In plain terms, it likely sets out the rules for when someone who has been charged with a crime — but is found not guilty or has charges dropped — can recover their legal costs from the prosecution.\n\n**Why this matters to you:**\n- If you were charged with an offence and the case was dismissed or you were acquitted (found not guilty), this Act may give you the right to claim back your legal fees\n- It sets limits and conditions on when such costs can be awarded\n- It would affect defendants, prosecutors, courts, and legal practitioners in WA\n\n**Please note:** No detailed analysis can be provided without the actual legislative text. Visit the [WA Parliamentary Counsel's Office](https://www.legislation.wa.gov.au) directly to locate the current version of this Act."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":4,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"The Act’s core function — to provide for payment of accused persons’ costs in official prosecutions — remains, but its scope and operating details have been amended over time. The compilation table and amendment notes show multiple changes. Notable changes reflected in the current text include: (a) an explicit external reference to the legal costs scale set under the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2022 (s.5(5)); (b) the statutory definition of \"successful\" preserves exceptions tied to mental impairment legislation (s.4(2)(a)(i)) as amended by the Criminal Law (Mental Impairment) Act 2023 (see compilation notes and amendment references); and (c) procedural and payment arrangements clarified or updated across amendments so the Act now binds the Crown and specifies different payment mechanisms depending on whether the prosecutor is a State official (payment from the Consolidated Account via the Treasurer) or employed by a local government/statutory body (costs ordered against that body and recoverable as a civil debt) (s.3, s.9). These changes alter operational detail and funding paths while preserving the Act’s original subject-matter."},"complexity_factors":["Cross-references to other statutes and external instruments (Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2022 for costs scale) (s.5(5))","Detailed statutory definitions determining \"successful\" and \"partly successful\" with exceptions (s.4(2))","Different payment routes depending on the employer of the public official prosecutor (Consolidated Account via Treasurer vs statutory body liability) (s.9(a)–(b))","Judicial discretion to refuse or reduce costs for specified accused conduct (s.6) creating case-by-case variability","Interaction with appeal timing (entitlement deferred pending appeal resolution) (s.5(2))","Procedural provision allowing adjournment to chambers for evidentiary submissions on costs (s.8)"],"plain_english_summary":"# What this law does, who it affects, and how it works\n\nThis Act sets rules for when a person charged in an \"official prosecution\" can get their legal expenses paid. \"Official prosecution\" means a charge brought by a public official or someone acting for a public official (for example a Minister, a public servant, a police officer, or someone employed by a local government or statutory body) in the Magistrates Court or the Children’s Court, and includes appeals (s.4(1)).\n\nMechanics (what changes or establishes):\n\n- Entitlement: If an accused person is \"successful\" (defined to include acquittal, certain discharges, dismissal for want of prosecution, or having a conviction set aside), they are entitled to their costs, subject to the Act (s.4(2)(a), s.5(1)).\n- Who decides amounts: The summary court sets costs where success is by the summary court (but payment is deferred until the appeal period has passed or any appeal is resolved in the accused’s favour) (s.5(2)). The appeal court sets costs for appeals and where it overturns a summary court decision it sets costs for both courts (s.5(3)–(4)).\n- Scale of costs: Except for court fees, amounts are to follow the scale in a legal costs determination made under the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2022 s.133 (s.5(5)).\n- Discretion to refuse or reduce costs: A court can refuse or reduce costs where the accused’s conduct contributed unreasonably to the institution or continuation of proceedings, where they behaved to prolong proceedings or cause unnecessary expense, or where the court disposed of the charge without recording a conviction after finding guilt (s.6).\n- Partly successful accused: A person partly successful (for example, convicted of a lesser offence) may recover additional costs caused by the successful parts of the prosecution if the court is satisfied (s.4(2)(b), s.7(1)–(3)).\n- Procedure for deciding costs: The court can adjourn questions of costs to chambers to hear submissions and evidence, including affidavits (s.8).\n- Who pays and how: If the prosecution involved a Minister, State public service employee, police member, or someone acting for them, the court’s certificate is produced to the Treasurer and the accused is paid out of the Consolidated Account (s.9(a)). If the prosecution involved a local government employee or other statutory body employee or their agent, the costs are ordered against that body and must be paid by it and are recoverable as a civil debt (s.9(b)).\n- Overriding effect and Crown binding: The Act applies notwithstanding other Acts or court rules, and where another provision is more favourable to the accused it prevails; the Act binds the Crown (s.3).\n\nPurpose claims and their operational tests\n\n- The Act’s stated purpose is to amend the law about payment of costs to accused persons in official prosecutions (long title). That purpose is implemented by granting an entitlement to costs for successful accused persons and setting how and by whom those costs are assessed and paid (ss.4–9).\n\n- Who pays: Payment is either from public funds (Consolidated Account) where the prosecutor is a State official (s.9(a)), or by the relevant local government/statutory body where the prosecutor is employed by such a body (s.9(b)). This allocates the direct financial burden to different public payers depending on who brought the prosecution.\n\n- Who decides and where discretion sits: Courts (summary or appeal courts) determine entitlement and amount, but they have express discretion to refuse or reduce costs for specified accused conduct (s.5–7). That discretion concentrates decision-making in judicial officers rather than administrators.\n\n- Incentives and trade-offs: Because costs are payable from public funds or by the statutory employer of the prosecutor, prosecutors’ employers bear the monetary cost of failed prosecutions (s.9). The Act may therefore change incentives for public prosecutors or their employers indirectly (by imposing a potential cost of unsuccessful prosecutions), but the Act itself leaves prosecutorial charging and conduct decisions to existing authorities and processes (this is a description of the mechanism; the Act does not prescribe prosecutorial practice).\n\nPractical implementation points, compliance burdens and risks\n\n- Timing and conditionality: Where success is in the summary court only, payment is conditional on the appeal period expiring without an appeal or on the appeal being resolved in the accused’s favour (s.5(2)). That can delay payment.\n- Administrative steps: For State-employed prosecutors, the accused must be provided a court certificate and present it to the Treasurer to obtain payment from the Consolidated Account (s.9(a)). For local government/statutory body prosecutions, the costs order is directed at the body and enforceable as a civil debt (s.9(b)); that may require collection action if the body does not pay.\n- Dependence on external scales and rules: The monetary calculation (other than court fees) is governed by an external legal costs determination under the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2022 (s.5(5)), so rates and categories are set outside this Act and may change over time.\n- Judicial discretion and evidential process: Courts can adjourn to chambers for submissions and affidavit evidence on costs (s.8), and have broad discretion to deny or reduce costs if the accused’s conduct is found to have unreasonably contributed to prosecutions or prolonged them (s.6). This creates case-by-case variability in outcomes.\n\nWho pays, who decides, and what behaviour changes (plain summary):\n\n- Who pays: either the Consolidated Account (Treasurer) when prosecutors are State officers (s.9(a)), or the prosecuting local government/statutory body when prosecution is by their employee or agent (s.9(b)).\n- Who decides: summary courts and appeal courts set entitlement and amounts; courts retain discretion to reduce or refuse costs for specified accused conduct (ss.5–7). Adjudication of cost disputes can be adjourned to chambers (s.8).\n- Behaviour changes: The Act creates a legal pathway for accused persons to recover costs after successful official prosecutions and shifts direct financial responsibility for those costs onto public payers depending on the prosecutor’s employer (s.5, s.9). The Act also creates judicial incentives to assess whether accused conduct contributed to proceedings before awarding costs (s.6).\n\nMaterial trade-offs and implementation risks to watch for (mechanisms, not judgements):\n\n- Fiscal exposure vs accountability: Payment from public funds (s.9(a)) or by statutory employers (s.9(b)) means unsuccessful official prosecutions can create fiscal obligations for government budgets or local statutory bodies.\n- Administrative delay and proof: The entitlement may be delayed until appeals are exhausted (s.5(2)), and courts may require evidence and hearings on costs (s.8), which imposes time and administrative costs on accused persons and courts.\n- Judicially managed discretion: The court’s power to refuse or reduce costs for certain accused conduct (s.6) introduces case-specific uncertainty about recoverability of costs.\n\nReference to where these mechanics appear: see sections 3–9 (definitions and core rules), and 4(2)(a)–(b) for the definitions of \"successful\" and \"partly successful\".\n\nThis summary relies only on the Act’s text (including the definitions and procedural provisions) to describe its effects and the concrete mechanisms through which those effects arise."},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The legislation remains tightly focused on its original purpose: awarding costs to accused persons in official prosecutions. While it has been amended 15+ times since 1973, these amendments have been technical updates (changing court names, updating references to other Acts like the Criminal Procedure Act 2004, adjusting cost-scaling mechanisms) rather than expansions of scope. The core mechanism—costs for successful defendants in government prosecutions—has remained unchanged."},"complexity_factors":["Only 9 operative sections (one deleted), with straightforward sequential structure","8 defined terms in a single interpretation section (s. 4), all clearly defined","Simple conditional logic: 'if successful, then entitled to costs' with three specific exceptions in s. 6","Minimal cross-referencing: only references to Criminal Procedure Act 2004, Criminal Code, and Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2022 for procedural/scaling matters","Clear hierarchy: successful (s. 5) vs partly successful (s. 7) vs unsuccessful (s. 4(2)(c))","No nested exceptions or complex deeming provisions","Payment mechanism in s. 9 is binary (State vs local government/statutory body) with clear triggers"],"plain_english_summary":"This Western Australian law ensures that people who are prosecuted by government officials (police, public servants, etc.) and win their case can get their legal costs back from the government.\n\n**What it does:**\n- **Automatic entitlement**: If you're found not guilty, if charges are dismissed, or if your conviction is overturned on appeal, you are entitled to have your legal expenses paid by the State (Section 5).\n- **Partly successful accused**: If you're charged with multiple offences and only convicted of some, or convicted of a lesser charge, the court can order you get costs for the charges you beat (Section 7).\n- **Exceptions**: The court can refuse or reduce costs if you did something unreasonable that caused the prosecution, or if you unnecessarily dragged out the proceedings (Section 6).\n- **Who pays**: Costs are paid from the Consolidated Account (government funds) if the prosecutor was a police officer or public servant. If the prosecutor was a local council or statutory body, that body pays (Section 9).\n\n**Key definitions:**\n- **Official prosecution**: Criminal charges brought by a public official (police, public servant, local government officer) acting in their official capacity.\n- **Successful accused**: Someone acquitted, discharged, or who had their conviction set aside (but not if found not guilty due to mental impairment).\n\n**Why it matters:**\nThis prevents the government from using its vast resources to bully citizens into pleading guilty. If you fight a wrongful charge and win, you don't end up out of pocket for legal fees. It acts as a check on prosecutorial overreach."},"issue_detection":{"absurdities":[],"contradictions":[]}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/official-prosecutions-accused-s-costs-act-1973","history":"/api/acts/official-prosecutions-accused-s-costs-act-1973/history","analysis":"/api/acts/official-prosecutions-accused-s-costs-act-1973/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/official-prosecutions-accused-s-costs-act-1973/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/official-prosecutions-accused-s-costs-act-1973/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/official-prosecutions-accused-s-costs-act-1973/documents"}}