Re Young - [2024] VSC 675

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S ECR 2024 0241

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977 (Vic)

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application for bail by Tenzin YOUNG

---

JUDGE:	Elliott J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	30 October 2024
DATE OF RULING:	30 October 2024
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re Young
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2024] VSC 675

---

CRIMINAL LAW — Bail — Applicant charged with Schedule 2 offences alleged to have been committed while on bail for another Schedule 2 offence and while subject to a community correction order for other Schedule 2 offences — Requirement to show exceptional circumstances — Nature and seriousness of alleged offending — Strength of prosecution case — Criminal history — Availability of treatment and support service — Special vulnerability — Personal circumstances — Exceptional circumstances established — Applicant not an unacceptable risk — Bail granted for a fixed period — Bail Act 1977 (Vic), ss 1B, 3, 3AAAA, 3AAA, 4AA, 4A, 4D, 4E, 5AAA.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the applicant	R Backwell	RA Criminal Lawyers
For the respondent	A Singh (solicitor)	Victoria Police

HIS HONOUR:

A. Introduction

On 15 October 2024, an application for bail was filed in this court on behalf of Tenzin Young (“Young”).
On 17 July 2024, Young was arrested and charged in relation to a number of drug and other offences. He has been on remand since that date.
At the time of his arrest, Young was on bail in relation to a number of separate alleged drug and other offences and was also the subject of a summons, a community correction order, an intervention order and an interim intervention order.[1]
[1]Further details of these matters are outlined in pars 8–44 below.
Young had previously made 2 applications for bail in the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria at Moorabbin on 18 July 2024 and 14 August 2024. Both applications were refused on the basis that Young was unable to demonstrate exceptional circumstances to justify the grant of bail.
In support of his application for bail before this court, Young relied upon the combined weight of a number of factors said to support the existence of exceptional circumstances justifying the grant of bail. It was further suggested that any risk associated with a grant of bail could not be considered unacceptable. In both respects, Young placed particular weight upon the availability of a 16‑week residential drug rehabilitation program.
Young’s application for bail was opposed on the basis that exceptional circumstances had not been established. In any event, the prosecution submitted Young would, if granted bail, present an unacceptable risk of endangering the safety or welfare of any person (whether by committing an offence that has that effect or by any other means)[2] and failing to surrender into custody in accordance with conditions of bail.[3]
[2]Bail Act 1977 (Vic), s 4E(1)(a)(i).
[3]Ibid, s 4E(1)(a)(iv).
For the reasons that follow, bail will be granted for a fixed period under…

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 Young

Details

AGLC: Re Young [2024] VSC 675
Case: [2024] VSC 675
Decision Date: 30 October 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Re Young involved a person facing charges for Schedule 2 offences, which were alleged to have occurred while the applicant was on bail for another Schedule 2 offence and was subject to a community correction order for previous Schedule 2 offences. The dispute centred on whether the applicant was eligible for bail, given the exceptional circumstances required under the Bail Act 1977 (Vic). The matter was heard by the County Court of Victoria.

The court had to determine whether exceptional circumstances existed to justify granting bail to the applicant. This involved assessing the nature and seriousness of the alleged offences, the strength of the prosecution case, the applicant's criminal history, and the availability of treatment and support services. Additionally, the court examined the applicant's special vulnerability and personal circumstances. The primary legal issue was whether these factors collectively constituted exceptional circumstances warranting bail.

In ruling on the application, the court found that the applicant had established exceptional circumstances. It noted that the applicant was not an unacceptable risk to the community, despite the serious nature of the alleged offences. The court considered the strength of the prosecution's case, the applicant's criminal history, and the potential for treatment and support services to address underlying issues. Personal circumstances were also weighed, leading the court to conclude that bail could be granted for a fixed period. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion under the Bail Act to grant bail, taking into account all relevant factors.

The final orders included granting the applicant bail for a specified period, subject to certain conditions. The court imposed strict bail conditions to ensure the applicant's compliance and to mitigate any potential risk to the community.

Orders