R v Choi [2019] NSWSC 1731

R v Choi [2019] NSWSC 1731

Although the unresolved lack of access to a suitably cleared Korean interpreter constituted grounds for a further release application, the risk that Mr Choi might leave the jurisdiction remained unacceptable and could not be mitigated by suitable conditions; the proposed $10,000 surety was wholly inadequate. The application for a release order was therefore refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Bail Application / Second Application for a Release Order Following Previous Refusal of Bail; Trial Scheduled to Commence in February 2020
Outcome
Application for a release order refused.
Legal Topics
['unacceptable Risk' 'flight Risk' 'release Order' 'interpreter Access' 'fair Trial' 'suppression Order']
['criminal Law' 'bail'] ['unacceptable Risk' 'flight Risk' 'release Order' 'interpreter Access' 'fair Trial' 'suppression Order']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Bail Application / Second Application for a Release Order Following Previous Refusal of Bail; Trial Scheduled to Commence in February 2020

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether grounds existed for making a further release application under s 74(1) of the Bail Act 2013 (NSW).' 'Whether Mr Choi posed an unacceptable risk of leaving the jurisdiction that could not be mitigated by bail conditions.' "Whether the lack of access to a suitably cleared Korean interpreter affected Mr Choi's ability to prepare for trial and receive a fair trial."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although the unresolved lack of access to a suitably cleared Korean interpreter constituted grounds for a further release application, the risk that Mr Choi might leave the jurisdiction remained unacceptable and could not be mitigated by suitable conditions; the proposed $10,000 surety was wholly inadequate. The application for a release order was therefore refused.

Court Disposition

Application for a release order refused.

Orders

  • ['I refuse the application for a release order.' 'I note that the order made by Lonergan J on 29 October 2019 extending her earlier suppression order made on 18 October 2019 remains in force.' "I grant liberty to Mr Choi if so advised to apply on 48 hours' notice no earlier than 2 January 2020."]