Sherd v The Queen

Sherd applied to the Court of Appeal for bail pending the determination of his appeal against conviction. The central dispute concerned the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal to grant bail in such circumstances and the criteria that must be met for such an application to succeed.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether it possessed the inherent jurisdiction to grant bail to a convicted person pending an appeal against that conviction. Furthermore, the Court had to consider whether any specific circumstances, such as family hardship, constituted "special or exceptional circumstances" that would warrant the exercise of such jurisdiction.

In its reasoning, the Court affirmed that it possessed the inherent jurisdiction to grant bail pending an appeal. However, it clarified that the exercise of this jurisdiction is not unfettered and typically requires the demonstration of special or exceptional circumstances. The Court held that family hardship, while a significant personal consideration, did not, in itself, amount to the special or exceptional circumstances necessary to justify granting bail in this instance. Consequently, the application for bail was dismissed.