Re Clark (Bail Application) - [2025] VSC 601

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S ECR 2025 0212

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977

-and-

IN THE MATTER of an application for bail by JACK CLARK

BETWEEN:

JACK CLARK	Applicant
and
VICTORIA POLICE	Respondent

---

JUDGE:	Gorton J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	19 September 2025
DATE OF RULING:	19 September 2025
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re Clark (Bail Application)
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2025] VSC 601

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Application for bail – Applicant charged with firearm offences and contravention of family violence intervention order whilst on bail – Where applicant has history of firearm offences – Where applicant was twice subject to community correction orders – Where persons affected by family violence are supportive of bail application – Where availability of accommodation with family friend and ex-policeman – Where Court Integrated Services Program recommends the applicant for case management – Where firearms are two air rifles and a homemade PVC fruit gun – Where no suggestion that firearms ever used in a threatening manner – Where exceptional circumstances exist to justify grant of bail – Where the risk is acceptable with imposition of bail conditions – Bail Act 1977 (Vic) ss 4AA, 4A.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Ms Amy Peek-Lasry	Victoria Legal Aid
For the Respondent	Ms Jessica McCartney	Victoria Police

HIS HONOUR:

A Background

On Friday 19 September 2025, I granted bail to Mr Jack Clark, the applicant, gave some oral reasons, and said I would publish some more detailed reasons in due course. These are those reasons.
The applicant is a 27 year-old male who before his arrest resided with his parents in Waranga Shores in Victoria’s Campaspe Region. On 17 and 19 January 2025, the police searched those premises and found some firearms and ammunition that it is alleged belong to the applicant. The applicant was not present and was not arrested at that time.
On 25 March 2025, a final order was made under the Family Violence Protection Act 2008 that the applicant not contact or go within 200 metres of his three children and their mother. It was also ordered that any firearms authority held by the applicant be cancelled and that he immediately hand any firearms in his possession to the police. Also on 25 March 2025, an interim order was made under the Family Violence Protection Act 2008 that the applicant not commit family violence against his mother or be at his parents’ house without their permission and must leave immediately if requested to do so.
The following day, on 26 March 2025, the applicant was arrested and charged with six firearm offences (‘the 26 March 2025 charges’). He was released on bail. It was a condition of his bail that he not possess any firearms or firearm related items.
Some ten weeks later, on 5 June 2025, the applicant’s parents called the police, after leaving their house, and said that the applicant had…

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 Re Clark (Bail Application)

Details

AGLC: Re Clark (Bail Application) [2025] VSC 601
Case: [2025] VSC 601
Decision Date: 19 September 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Victoria, Jack Clark, the applicant, sought bail in relation to firearm offences and contravention of a family violence intervention order while on bail. The respondent was Victoria Police. The applicant was charged with firearm offences and contravention of a family violence intervention order while on bail. The legal issues before the court were whether there were exceptional circumstances that justified the grant of bail and whether there was an unacceptable risk if the applicant were granted bail. In determining whether exceptional circumstances existed, the court considered the surrounding circumstances, including the applicant's criminal history, the nature and seriousness of the alleged offending, the strength of the prosecution case, and the availability of treatment or bail support. The court also considered whether there was an unacceptable risk if the applicant were granted bail, including whether the imposition of any bail conditions could mitigate the risk. The court found that there were exceptional circumstances that justified the grant of bail, including the applicant's history of firearm offences and contravention of family violence intervention orders while on bail, the availability of accommodation with a family friend and ex-policeman, and the recommendation of the Court Integrated Services Program for case management. The court also found that the risk was acceptable with the imposition of bail conditions. The court granted the applicant bail on the conditions that he reside with a family friend and ex-policeman, respect a curfew, attend all scheduled meetings with and follow all lawful directions of the Court Integrated Services Program, and report to the Shepparton police station each Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.

Orders