Stalker v The Queen

The matter of Stalker v The Queen was heard in the High Court of Australia. The appellant, Stalker, sought bail pending the hearing of his appeal against conviction and sentence. The central issue before the court was the criteria and applicable test for granting bail in such circumstances, particularly whether the appeal must be most likely to succeed or if there are exceptional circumstances that warrant bail. The case presented an opportunity for the court to clarify the law regarding bail pending the hearing of an appeal.

The legal issues centred around the balance between the appellant's right to liberty and the need to ensure that the appellant does not interfere with the appeal process or pose a risk to the community. The court had to determine the standard of proof required for exceptional circumstances and whether the appeal must be most likely to succeed to grant bail. The court also needed to address the proper application of the test set out in previous case law, specifically the decision in R v SZJDB.

In resolving these issues, the court emphasised that the test for granting bail pending appeal is not solely dependent on the prospects of success of the appeal. Instead, the court must consider whether there are exceptional circumstances that warrant granting bail. The court held that while the appeal must have reasonable prospects of success, this is not the only factor to be considered. The court must also assess whether there are exceptional circumstances, such as significant prejudice to the appellant if bail is not granted, or whether the appellant poses a risk to the community. The court clarified that the test requires a balance between these considerations, and the decision must be made on a case-by-case basis.

Ultimately, the court found that the primary judge had applied the correct test but had erred in weighing the relevant considerations. The court held that the appeal must have reasonable prospects of success, but this is not the only factor to be considered. The court also found that exceptional circumstances must be taken into account, and the decision must be made on a balanced consideration of all relevant factors. The court allowed the appeal, quashed the decision of the primary judge, and remitted the matter for reconsideration in light of the court's reasoning.