In order to carry out the law, the Lord Chief Justice in England, with the opinion of the other judges, issues from time to time instructions on how to exercise the discretion of the courts as to how to award costs to a defendant who has been acquitted. In the 1959 guidelines, the Chief Justice instructed that each matter should be decided according to its circumstances and that strict rules should not be set in advance. At the same time, the Chief Justice further ruled that considerations can be considered as unreasonable conduct by the prosecution. See: Lord Parker C.J., Practice Direction (Costs in Criminal Cases) [1959] 1 W.L.R. 1090; 3 All E.R. 471. These guidelines were self-criticizing. In the opinion of the critics, it should be a rule in the criminal proceeding, as in civil law, that the loser pays the expenses of the other party. It was further stated that failure to reimburse expenses to the defendant who was acquitted is liable to violate his right to representation. It was therefore suggested that a presumption be established according to which expenses would be paid to the acquitted defendant unless good reasons were found not to do so. See A. Samuels “Costs for the Acquitted Defendant” [48].
- In 1973, the guidelines were changed after consultation with the judges of the-Queen’s Bench Division And the-Family Division; See Lord Widgery C.J., Practice Note [1973] 2 All E.R. 592. These guidelines established a principle, according to which expenses will generally be awarded to the acquitted defendant, unless it is found in the circumstances of a particular matter that it is forbidden to do so:
Although the award of costs must always remain a matter for the court’s discretion, in the light of the circumstances of the particular case, it should be accepted as normal practice that when the court has power to award costs out of central funds it should do so in favour of a successful defendant, unless there are positive reasons for making a different order.