Rajic v R

The case of Rajic v R involved the applicant, who was facing charges of trafficking cannabis in a commercial quantity, aggravated burglary, using a firearm while being a prohibited person, reckless conduct endangering life, cultivating cannabis, theft, and dealing with property suspected to be the proceeds of crime. The decision was made by the Supreme Court of Victoria, specifically by Justice Jane Frances Pullen. The key legal issues were whether exceptional circumstances existed to justify bail, and whether there was an unacceptable risk of the applicant reoffending if released on bail.

The court considered the argument that bail should be granted to allow the applicant to begin rehabilitation while on bail, citing cases such as Tran, Haddara, and Robinson. However, the court found that the combination of factors, including delay, the prospect of a bed at a rehabilitation facility, substantial support in the community, and a proposed surety, did not satisfy the exceptional circumstances test. The court also considered the nature of the charges, the applicant's criminal history, and the likely delay in the trial, concluding that there was no real prospect that time spent on remand would be dead time. Regarding the unacceptable risk question, the court found that the prosecution had discharged the burden of proof. The applicant was a persistent offender whose recent crimes were serious, and the risk of reoffending was high.

In conclusion, the court refused bail due to the unacceptable risk the applicant posed to the community if released. The court found that there were no conditions that could mitigate this risk to an acceptable level, and therefore, the applicant remained in custody. The court's decision was based on the seriousness of the charges, the applicant's criminal history, and the likelihood of reoffending.