Obeid v The Queen (No 1)

Case [2016] NSWCCA 320


Court of Criminal Appeal


Supreme Court


New South Wales

  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: Obeid v R (No 1) [2016] NSWCCA 320
Hearing dates:20 December 2016
Date of orders: 20 December 2016
Decision date: 20 December 2016
Before: Bathurst CJ; Hoeben CJ at CL; R A Hulme J
Decision:

Bail refused

Legislation Cited: Bail Act 2013 (NSW) s 22
Criminal Appeal Rules (NSW) r 4
Category:Procedural and other rulings
Parties: Edward Moses Obeid (Applicant)
Crown (Respondent)
Representation:

Counsel:
G Reynolds SC / D Hume (Applicant)
M McHugh SC/ B Narula (Respondent)

Solicitors:
Breene & Breene (Appellant)
Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent)
File Number(s):2016/376130
 Decision under appeal 
Court or tribunal:
Supreme Court of NSW
Jurisdiction:
Common Law - Criminal
Citation:
[2016] NSWSC 1840
Date of Decision:
15 December 2016
Before:
Beech-Jones J
File Number(s):
2015/53925

Judgment

  1. THE COURT: The Court has reached a view on this matter but it is not in a position now to give detailed reasons but will give a summary of its reasons, particularly in case this matter is taken further. The Court is of the view that there are no special or exceptional circumstances to warrant the grant of bail, pending any appeal which may be lodged.

  2. Leaving aside the matters argued on the merits of the appeal, the other matters raised in the submissions concerning the personal circumstances of Mr Obeid do not amount to special or exceptional circumstances, particularly where the Court is in a position to grant a hearing date in respect of any appeal on 15 March 2017.

  3. So far as the matters raised in the grounds of appeal are concerned, the matters raised should have been raised before the trial judge and no direct explanation has been given as to the reasons they were not. To raise these grounds it would be necessary for it to be demonstrated that there was a miscarriage of justice having regard to the provisions of r 4 of the Criminal Appeal Rules. In these circumstances, whilst the Court is of the view that the grounds of appeal are arguable and it may well be that leave to raise these grounds is given in due course when the appeal is heard, it does not seem to us in the present case that in those circumstances the case is sufficiently strong to warrant, either on its own or in conjunction with the other circumstances, special or exceptional circumstances such as to enable bail to be given having regard to the provisions of s 22 of the Bail Act 2013. In those circumstances, the application is refused.

ADDENDUM:  Refer to Obeid (No 2) [2016] NSWCCA 321.

**********

Amendments

08 February 2017 - Addendum added

08 February 2017 - Representation amended

Details
AGLC
Obeid v The Queen (No 1) [2016] NSWCCA 320
Case
[2016] NSWCCA 320
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Edward Moses Obeid applied to the Court of Criminal Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales for bail pending appeal of his conviction and sentence. The Crown opposed the application. Obeid had been convicted in the Supreme Court of a number of offences and sentenced to a lengthy term of imprisonment. The appeal was in respect of both conviction and sentence. The Court of Criminal Appeal was required to decide whether there were special or exceptional circumstances to warrant bail pending appeal.

The Court of Criminal Appeal considered the relevant provisions of the Bail Act 2013 and the Criminal Appeal Rules. The Court noted that there were no special or exceptional circumstances to warrant bail. The Court also noted that the matters raised on appeal could have been raised at trial and no explanation had been given for why they were not. The Court found that the grounds of appeal were arguable, but this did not amount to special or exceptional circumstances to warrant bail. The Court also noted that the Court could set a hearing date for the appeal in March 2017.

The Court of Criminal Appeal refused bail. The Court found that there were no special or exceptional circumstances to warrant bail pending appeal. The Court noted that the matters raised on appeal could have been raised at trial and no explanation had been given for why they were not. The Court also noted that the grounds of appeal were arguable, but this did not amount to special or exceptional circumstances to warrant bail. The Court also noted that the Court could set a hearing date for the appeal in March 2017.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.