6ACosts of proceedings not completed by reason of death of judge etc

6A Costs of proceedings not completed by reason of death of judge etc

6A Costs of proceedings not completed by reason of death of judge etc

(1) Where on or after the day on which Her Majesty’s assent to the Suitors’ Fund (Amendment) Act 1959 is signified—

(a) any civil or criminal proceedings are rendered abortive by the death or protracted illness of the judge before whom the proceedings were had,

(a1) any civil or criminal proceedings are rendered abortive for the purposes of this paragraph by section 46A (Appeal against damages may be heard by 2 Judges) of the Supreme Court Act 1970 or section 6AA (Appeal against sentence may be heard by 2 judges) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912, because the judges who heard the proceedings were divided in opinion as to the decision determining the proceedings,

(b) an appeal on a question of law against the conviction of a person (in this section referred to as the appellant) convicted on indictment is upheld and a new trial is ordered, or

(c) the hearing of any civil or criminal proceedings is discontinued and a new trial ordered by the presiding judge for a reason not attributable in any way to disagreement on the part of the jury, where the proceedings were with a jury, or to the act, neglect or default, in the case of civil proceedings, of all or of any one or more of the parties thereto or their counsel or attorneys, or, in the case of criminal proceedings, of the accused or the accused’s counsel or attorney, and the presiding judge grants a certificate (which certificate the presiding judge is hereby authorised to grant)—

(i) in the case of civil proceedings—to any party thereto stating the reason why the proceedings were discontinued and a new trial ordered and that the reason was not attributable in any way to disagreement on the part of the jury, where the proceedings were with a jury, or to the act, neglect or default of all or of any one or more of the parties to the proceedings or their counsel or attorneys, or

(ii) in the case of criminal proceedings—to the accused stating the reason why the proceedings were discontinued and a new trial ordered and that the reason was not attributable in any way to disagreement on the part of the jury or to the act, neglect or default of the accused or the accused’s counsel or attorney,

and any party to the civil proceedings or the accused in the criminal proceedings or the appellant, as the case may be, incurs additional costs (in this section referred to as additional costs) by reason of the new trial that is had as a consequence of the proceedings being so rendered abortive or as a consequence of the order for a new trial, as the case may be, then the Director-General may, upon application made in that behalf, authorise the payment from the Fund to the party or the accused or the appellant, as the case may be, of the costs (in this section referred to as original costs), or such part thereof as the Director-General may determine, incurred by the party or the accused or the appellant, as the case may be, in the proceedings before they were so rendered abortive or the conviction was quashed or the hearing of the proceedings was so discontinued, as the case may be.