Re GS - [2024] VSC 439

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S ECR 2024 0157

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977 (Vic)

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application for bail by GS

---

JUDGE:	Elliott J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATES OF HEARINGS:	16, 19, 23 and 26 July 2024
DATES OF RULINGS:	19 and 26 July 2024
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re GS
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2024] VSC 439

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Bail – 16 year old child – Schedule 2 offences alleged to have been committed whilst subject to a summons for another Schedule 2 offence – Applicant required to show exceptional circumstances – Nature and seriousness of alleged offending – Strength of prosecution case – Whether time spent on remand likely to exceed any term of imprisonment – Criminal history – Personal circumstances – Special vulnerability – Availability of bail support services – Exceptional circumstances established – Risk not shown to be unacceptable if bail granted for 1 week on strict conditions – Bail granted for 1 week – Compliance with all conditions during 1 week period of bail – Further application – Further application not opposed by the respondent – Further application granted – Bail Act 1977 (Vic), ss 1B, 3AAA, 3B, 4AA, 4A, 4D, 4E, 5AAA.

---

APPEARANCES:

Counsel

Solicitors

For the applicant

B Proud

Claudia Grimberg Lawyers

For the respondent

N Moran (solicitor)
(16, 19 and 23 July 2024)

P McKimmie (solicitor)
(26 July 2024)

Victoria Police

HIS HONOUR:

A. Introduction

On 3 July 2024, the applicant, GS,[1] was arrested and charged in relation to:
(1)12 offences he is alleged to have committed on 28 June 2024 (being charges 1 to 12).
(2)4 offences he is alleged to have committed on 2 July 2024 (being charges 13 to 16).
[1]The pseudonym “GS” has been used to protect the identity of the applicant and to ensure compliance with s 534(1)(a)(ii) of the Children, Youth and Families Act 2005 (Vic).
At the first hearing of this application on 16 July 2024, the prosecution provided the court with an updated preliminary brief containing an additional 5 charges GS is alleged to have committed on 28 June 2024 (being charges 17 to 21).
The 17 offences alleged to have been committed on 28 June 2024 comprise:
(1)Four charges of aggravated burglary, contrary to section 77(1) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) (charges 1, 2, 8 and 21).
(2)Two charges of theft of a motor vehicle, contrary to section 74(1) of the Crimes Act (charges 3 and 5).
(3)Armed robbery, contrary to section 75A(1) of the Crimes Act (charge 4).
(4)Two charges of attempting to commit an indictable offence, namely burglary, contrary to section 321M of the Crimes Act (charges 6 and 7).
(5)Two charges of theft, contrary to section 74(1) of the Crimes Act (charges 9 and 18).
(6)Three charges of robbery, contrary to section 75(1) of the Crimes Act (charges 10, 11, 12).
(7)Three charges of attempting to commit an indictable offence,…

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 GS

Details

AGLC: Re GS [2024] VSC 439
Case: [2024] VSC 439
Decision Date: 26 July 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Re GS, the applicant, a 16-year-old child, sought bail in the County Court of Victoria. The applicant was facing allegations of Schedule 2 offences, which were alleged to have been committed while the applicant was subject to a summons for another Schedule 2 offence. The Crown opposed the bail application on the basis that the applicant required exceptional circumstances to be established to be granted bail.

The court was required to decide whether the applicant had established exceptional circumstances to warrant bail. The court considered the nature and seriousness of the alleged offending, the strength of the prosecution case, the risk that time spent on remand would likely exceed any term of imprisonment, the applicant's criminal history, personal circumstances, special vulnerability, and the availability of bail support services. The court also considered whether the risk was unacceptable if bail was granted for one week on strict conditions.

The court found that the applicant had established exceptional circumstances, and the risk was not shown to be unacceptable if bail was granted for one week on strict conditions. The court granted bail for one week, with strict conditions. The applicant was required to comply with all conditions during the one-week period of bail. The applicant made a further application for bail, which was not opposed by the respondent. The further application was granted, and the applicant was granted bail subject to strict conditions.

The court's decision was based on the Bail Act 1977 (Vic), sections 1B, 3AAA, 3B, 4AA, 4A, 4D, 4E, and 5AAA. The court found that the exceptional circumstances established by the applicant warranted the granting of bail for one week on strict conditions. The court also found that the risk was not unacceptable if bail was granted for one week on strict conditions.

Orders