Re Dalton - [2013] VSC 738

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

No. SCR 2013 0165

IN THE MATTER of an application for bail by Paul Dalton

---

JUDGE:	MACAULAY J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	19 December 2013
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	19 December 2013
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re Dalton
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2013] VSC 738

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Bail – Application for bail – Applicant charged with murder – Bail sought in order to obtain medical treatment – s 47(1)(f) of the Correction Act 1986 considered – Bail not generally to be used for the purpose of enforcing rights owed by prison authorities under the Corrections Act 1986 – No exceptional circumstances – Application refused.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Mr Colin Mandy	Michael Gleeson & Associates
For the Prosecution	Ms Jane Warren	Office of Public Prosecutions

HIS HONOUR:

Paul Dalton, aged 44 years, is charged with the murder of Robyn Michelle Hall on or about 19 December 2012 at Cape Woolamai in Victoria. He was arrested and charged with the murder of the deceased on 28 January 2013 and has been in custody since that time. He now applies for bail.

Bail shall not be granted to a person charged with murder unless a judge of the Supreme Court is satisfied that exceptional circumstances exist which justify the making of such an order.[1]
[1]Bail Act 1977, s 14(2).

A combination of factors and matters can give rise to ‘exceptional circumstances’. In Re Kane, [2] Lasry J set out a number of principles, particularly applicable to this case, which I gratefully adopt:
[2]Re Kane [2010] VSC 8.

In R v Moloney,[3] Vincent J said:
[3]Re Moloney, John Denis (Bail Application) [1990] VSC (Unreported, Vincent J, 31 October 1990) 1-2.
A number of decisions which have been handed down by judges in this Court, however, make it clear that such circumstances may exist as a result of the interaction of a variety of factors which of themselves might not be regarded as exceptional. What is ultimately of significance is that viewed as a whole, the circumstances can be regarded as exceptional to the extent that, taking into account the very serious nature of the charge to which they are applicable, the making of an order admitting the person to bail would be justified.

In DPP v Sabino Cozzi,[4] Coldrey J expressed agreement with the approach of Vincent J in Moloney and reviewed several of the cases which subsequently discussed the meaning of “exceptional circumstances”. He noted:
[4][2005] VSC 195.
An examination of the cases bearing upon this concept reveals a multitude of single and conflicting interpretations thrown up, no doubt, by the variety of fact situations with which Judges have been faced.
His Honour went on to refer to a variety of circumstances which had been found in various cases to constitute exceptional circumstances and summarising those to which his Honour referred they included:

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 Dalton

Details

AGLC: Re Dalton [2013] VSC 738
Case: [2013] VSC 738
Decision Date: 19 December 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter of Re Dalton involved the applicant, Dalton, who was charged with the offence of murder. Dalton applied for bail to obtain medical treatment, which he claimed was necessary for his health. The application was heard by the court, which was required to consider the relevant provisions of the Corrections Act 1986, particularly section 47(1)(f). The central issue before the court was whether the applicant's need for medical treatment constituted an exceptional circumstance warranting the grant of bail, despite the serious nature of the charge against him.

The court examined the provisions of the Corrections Act 1986 and noted that bail is generally not granted for the purpose of enforcing rights owed by prison authorities under the Act. The court emphasised that bail should not be used as a means to compel the prison authorities to provide medical treatment. In this case, the applicant's need for medical treatment was not considered to be an exceptional circumstance that would warrant the grant of bail. The court found that there were no exceptional circumstances present in this case, and therefore, the application for bail was refused.

The court's decision was based on the principle that bail is not to be used as a mechanism for enforcing rights owed by prison authorities under the Corrections Act 1986. The court held that the applicant's need for medical treatment did not constitute an exceptional circumstance warranting the grant of bail, particularly given the serious nature of the charge against him. As a result, the application for bail was refused, and no further orders were made.

Orders