Re Taylor - [2024] VSC 233

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S ECR 2024 0077

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977 (Vic)

- and -

IN THE MATTER of an application for bail by Robin TAYLOR

---

JUDGE:	Fox J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	7 May 2024
DATE OF RULING:	8 May 2024
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re Taylor
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2024] VSC 233

---

CRIMINAL LAW — Bail — Applicant charged with one charge of trafficking in a commercial quantity of drugs of dependence, nine charges of trafficking in a drug of dependence and 18 charges of dealing with proceeds of crime — Required to show exceptional circumstances — Relevant criminal history — Six of the nine trafficking charges do not disclose an offence known to law — Strength of prosecution case on principal charge insofar as proof of a commercial quantity is required — Exceptional circumstances established — Unacceptable risk alleged — Whether applicant is an unacceptable risk of endangering the safety or welfare of any person by further offending and/or failing to answer bail — Risk not unacceptable if granted bail on strict conditions — Application granted — Bail Act 1977 (Vic) ss 3AAA, 4AA & 4E; Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 (Vic) ss 70, 71AA(1) & Sch 11; Taylor v The Queen [2020] VSCA 50.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Crown	Ms D Hogan	Office of Public Prosecution
For the Accused	Mr J Dickinson KC with Mr S Tovey	Melasecca, Kelly & Zayler

HER HONOUR:

Introduction

Robin Taylor (‘the applicant’) applies for bail on the following 28 charges:

(a) Traffick in a commercial quantity of drugs of dependence (one charge);

(b) Traffick in a drug of dependence (nine charges); and

(c) Deal with proceeds of crime (18 charges).

At the time of the alleged offending, the applicant was serving a three year suspended sentence imposed in the County Court on 19 August 2022 for a single offence of trafficking in a drug of dependence.

It is common ground that the applicant must establish that exceptional circumstances exist justifying his admission to bail. Pursuant to the Bail Act1977 (Vic) (‘the Act’), the exceptional circumstances test applies via two pathways. One, trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence is a Schedule 1 offence.[1] Two, trafficking in a drug of dependence is a Schedule 2 offence,[2] and the applicant is charged with nine Schedule 2 offences alleged to have been committed while he was serving a sentence for a Schedule 2 offence.[3]
[1]Bail Act1977 (Vic) Sch 1 Item 6(b); s 4AA(1) (‘the Act’).
[2]Ibid Sch 2 Item 24(b).
[3]Ibid s 4AA(2)(c)(v).

Alleged offending

The applicant is the owner and director of Melbourne Sports Medicine & Anti‑Aging Clinic (‘Clinic’) in Moonee Ponds.

The applicant is not a qualified medical practitioner. It is alleged that he used the Clinic as a front to sell a variety of prescription drugs — specifically, drugs commonly…

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 Taylor

Details

AGLC: Re Taylor [2024] VSC 233
Case: [2024] VSC 233
Decision Date: 8 May 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, [Name], was charged with one count of trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, nine counts of trafficking in a drug of dependence, and 18 counts of dealing with proceeds of crime. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The applicant sought bail under the Bail Act 1977 (Vic). The legal issues before the court were whether the applicant had demonstrated exceptional circumstances warranting bail, given the nature and seriousness of the charges, and whether there were unacceptable risks to the community if bail was granted.

The court considered the applicant's criminal history, the strength of the prosecution's case, and the potential for the applicant to reoffend. It was noted that six of the nine trafficking charges did not constitute an offence known to law. Regarding the principal charge, the court acknowledged that proving a commercial quantity would be challenging. The court found that exceptional circumstances were established, and while the risk of reoffending was significant, it was not deemed unacceptable if bail was granted with strict conditions. The court concluded that the applicant could be released on bail, provided certain stringent conditions were met to mitigate the risk to the community.

The court granted the applicant's bail application, subject to strict conditions. These conditions included residence at a specified address, regular check-ins with a bail supervisor, adherence to a curfew, and the surrender of all travel documents. The court emphasised the importance of these conditions to ensure the applicant's compliance and to address the risk of reoffending. The decision hinged on the applicant's ability to adhere to the imposed conditions, which the court believed would sufficiently manage the risk to the community.

Orders