Re Ghanim - [2019] VSC 358

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S ECR 2019 0070

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977

-and-

IN THE MATTER of an Application for Bail by SALWYN GHANIM

---

JUDGE:	LASRY J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	10 April 2019
DATE OF RULING:	10 April 2019
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re Ghanim
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2019] VSC 358

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Application for bail – Applicant charged with Schedule 1 offences –Whether exceptional circumstances justify bail – Whether applicant, if bailed, presents an unacceptable risk – Application opposed – Applicant on youth parole at time of alleged offending - Release on supervised bail program not supported by Youth Justice – Significant criminal history – Prior convictions for bail offences – Exceptional circumstances not established – Applicant presents an unacceptable risk – Bail refused – Bail Act 1977 (Vic) ss 1B, 3AAA, 4, 4AA, 4D, and 4E.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Mr C Terry	Emma Turnbull Lawyers
For the Respondent	Mr P D’Arcy	Office of Public Prosecutions

HIS HONOUR:

This is an application for bail by Salwyn Ghanim, who was arrested and charged in relation to an incident involving a home invasion and subsequent police pursuit in Hoppers Crossing on 13 June 2018.

On 6 September 2018, the applicant was charged with further offences in relation to the same incident.

On 5 February 2019, the charges against the applicant proceeded by way of a contested committal, and the applicant was committed to stand trial in the County Court of Victoria. The County Court has fixed a trial date for that matter on 28 January 2020. The matters for which the accused is committed to stand trial include:

· aggravated home invasion;

· attempted theft;

· aggravated offence of intentionally exposing an emergency worker to risk by driving (two counts);

· reckless conduct endangering serious injury;

· criminal damage (three counts);

· theft of a motor vehicle;

· theft from a motor vehicle;

· handling stolen goods (three counts);

· burglary;

· theft;

· home invasion; and

· aggravated offence of recklessly exposing an emergency worker to risk by driving (two counts).

As I understand it, these charges all relate to a home invasion and the consequent activities that occurred once the police attended the scene.

The applicant is also charged with the summary offences of going equipped to steal, failing to stop a vehicle on police direction, possession of a controlled weapon without excuse, and driving whilst disqualified. On 5 February 2019, those offences were transferred to the County Court, pursuant to s 145 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic).

The applicant has been in custody since his arrest on 13 June 2018. Applications for bail failed on 9 August 2018 and following the hearing of the committal on 5 February 2019.

The alleged offending

The offences are alleged to have occurred on 13 June 2018, when at about 12:40 pm, the applicant, together with…

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 Ghanim

Details

AGLC: Re Ghanim [2019] VSC 358
Case: [2019] VSC 358
Decision Date: 10 April 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Ghanim, was before the court seeking bail in relation to serious charges under Schedule 1 of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic). Ghanim was facing allegations that necessitated the consideration of bail under stringent conditions. The application was opposed by the prosecution, highlighting the seriousness of the charges and the potential risk to the community if Ghanim were to be released.

The court was tasked with determining whether exceptional circumstances existed to justify bail and whether Ghanim, if granted bail, would present an unacceptable risk to the community. The court considered Ghanim's criminal history, which included previous convictions for bail offences, and the fact that he was on youth parole at the time of the alleged offending. The Youth Justice system did not support a release on a supervised bail program, further complicating the bail decision.

In evaluating the application, the court found that Ghanim had not demonstrated exceptional circumstances warranting bail. Given his significant criminal history, the risk he posed to the community if released on bail was deemed unacceptable. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion under the Bail Act 1977 (Vic) and denied the application for bail. The court's decision was based on the balance of considerations under sections 1B, 3AAA, 4, 4AA, 4D, and 4E of the Bail Act, which emphasised the need to protect the community and the gravity of the alleged offences.

Orders