Mickelberg v The Queen

The case of Mickelberg v The Queen involved the appellant, Mickelberg, who was convicted of drug offences, specifically possession with intent to supply. Mickelberg applied for bail pending his appeal against conviction and sentence. The High Court of Australia was tasked with determining whether exceptional circumstances existed to warrant bail. The primary issue was whether the substantial portion of the custodial sentence that would be served before the appeal was heard constituted an exceptional circumstance warranting bail.

The court considered the principle that a substantial period of custodial sentence to be served before an appeal is heard does not, by itself, constitute an exceptional circumstance. However, the court noted that other factors, such as the summing-up of the trial judge, could be relevant in determining exceptional circumstances. The court acknowledged that the summing-up had been critical in the trial and could impact the fairness and reliability of the trial process. Nevertheless, the court held that the summing-up alone did not establish exceptional circumstances warranting bail.

Ultimately, the court determined that while the summing-up was a relevant factor, it did not create exceptional circumstances sufficient to grant bail. The court emphasised that exceptional circumstances must be truly exceptional and go beyond the mere fact that a significant portion of the sentence would be served before the appeal was heard. The court concluded that the exceptional circumstances test was not met in this case, and the application for bail was dismissed. The High Court's decision underscores the stringent requirements for establishing exceptional circumstances in bail applications pending appeal.