Application for bail by LP - [2020] VSC 764

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S ECR 2020 0295

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977	Crown
v
IN THE MATTER of an Application for bail by LP	Accused

---

JUDGE:	Jane Dixon J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	13 November 2020
DATE OF RULING:	16 November 2020
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Application for bail by LP
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2020] VSC 764

---

CRIMINAL LAW — Application for bail — Charges of committing Schedule 2 offence whilst on bail for Schedule 2 offence — Allegations of family violence— Delay — Exceptional circumstances established —Unacceptable Risk of committing offences whilst on bail - Bail Act 1977 (Vic) ss 1B, 3AAA, 4, 4AA, 4A, 4D, 4E, 5AAAA.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Ms J Poole	Giorgianni & Liang Lawyers
For the Respondent	Ms D Karamicov	Office of Public Prosecutions

HER HONOUR:

The applicant is charged by First Constable Page (‘the Informant’) with a number of family violence offences (‘the Page charges’).

The complainant in respect of the Page charges is TVD, with whom the applicant had an ‘on again off again’ relationship over several years.

The charges relate to a series of incidents involving the applicant and TVD in November 2017 and subsequent text message communication aimed at dissuading TVD from pursuing her complaints. There are four groups of charges which are summarised below. Many of the below charges involve constellations of alternative charges.

By way of background context to the applicant’s circumstances in 2017, it should be noted that at the time of the alleged offending against TVD, the applicant was subject to a final Family Violence Intervention Order (‘FVIO’) for the protection of his former partner MD, his son BD, and another of MD’s children.[1] No breaches of that order are alleged.
[1]See Affidavit in Opposition of Corey Larkin dated 12 November 2020 (‘Affidavit in Opposition’), CJL- : that Order was made on 17 May 2017 and expires on 10 January 2021. It has full no contact conditions, and exceptions allowing for the applicant to see his child in accordance with any Order or written agreement, the applicant was present at the hearing where the Order was made and agreed to the order being made.

9 November 2017: the carpark incident
Summary

TVD alleges that on 9 November 2017, at approximately 9:45pm, she was pulling into a Westfield Shopping Centre carpark, when she noticed some headlights turn on in a car in front of her. She saw the applicant driving a car that appeared to be a rental vehicle he had been using. The applicant drove his vehicle towards the victim’s car, colliding with it head on, and blocking her vehicle in. He then got out of the rental vehicle. In order to evade the applicant, TVD mounted the gutter in her car and side swiped the applicant’s vehicle before driving straight home.

Charges

(a) Reckless conduct endangering serious injury (contrary to s 23 of the Crimes…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Application for bail by LP

Details

AGLC: Application for bail by LP [2020] VSC 764
Case: [2020] VSC 764
Decision Date: 16 November 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of an application for bail by LP, the applicant faced charges of committing a Schedule 2 offence while already on bail for another Schedule 2 offence. The dispute involved allegations of family violence and the issue of delay in the proceedings. The matter was heard in the Magistrates' Court of Victoria.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether LP had established exceptional circumstances to warrant bail and whether the risk of LP committing further offences while on bail was unacceptable. The court had to weigh the principles of the Bail Act 1977 (Vic) and consider the specific provisions that relate to bail for serious offences and allegations of family violence.

The court determined that exceptional circumstances were indeed present, given the nature of the allegations and the seriousness of the charges. It found that there was an unacceptable risk of LP committing further offences while on bail, considering the allegations of family violence. The court held that these factors outweighed the presumption in favour of bail under the Bail Act. Consequently, the application for bail was dismissed.

No further orders were made as the application was dismissed outright. The court emphasised the gravity of the charges and the need for the proceedings to proceed without the risk of further offending.

Orders