Re Manning

In the matter of Re Manning, the applicant sought to challenge a decision regarding bail. The applicant, who had been convicted of a criminal offence, initially applied for bail pending appeal after conviction but before sentencing. This application was unsuccessful. The applicant subsequently made a further application for bail pending appeal after being sentenced. The central issue before the court was whether the applicant had demonstrated exceptional circumstances, given that the fact of the applicant having been sentenced constituted a relevant change in circumstances, which reduced the likelihood of the applicant’s appeals being successful.

The court examined the nature and seriousness of the offence, the circumstances of the applicant, and the likelihood of the applicant appearing for sentencing if granted bail. The court noted that the applicant’s first application for bail had been refused, and that the imposition of a sentence was a significant change in circumstances. The applicant argued that exceptional circumstances existed, but the court found that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence to meet the high threshold required for such a demonstration. The court concluded that the change in circumstances did not sufficiently alter the balance of considerations to warrant granting bail.

Accordingly, the court refused the applicant’s further application for bail pending appeal. The court emphasised that the decision to grant bail pending appeal was a matter of discretion, and that the applicant had not demonstrated the exceptional circumstances necessary to warrant a reconsideration of the earlier decision. The court’s decision was based on a careful assessment of the relevant factors, including the seriousness of the offence and the risk of the applicant failing to appear for sentencing.