Ambury v R [2017] NSWCCA 115

Ambury v R [2017] NSWCCA 115

The applicant did not establish special or exceptional circumstances under s 22 of the Bail Act 2013. The Crown had not conceded Ground 5; alleged errors in earlier bail decisions were irrelevant to a fresh application; the delay and possible expiry of the non-parole period largely resulted from the applicant's own adjournment request; and the Court was not persuaded that the applicant's prospects of success, alone or together with custody preparation difficulties and family circumstances, were sufficiently strong to meet the statutory threshold.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Release Application Seeking Bail Pending Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Application
Outcome
Release application refused
Legal Topics
['bail Pending Appeal' 'special or Exceptional Circumstances' 'unacceptable Risk Test' 'leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence' 'child Prostitution Offences']
['criminal Law' 'bail' 'criminal Procedure'] ['bail Pending Appeal' 'special or Exceptional Circumstances' 'unacceptable Risk Test' 'leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence' 'child Prostitution Offences']

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

Release Application Seeking Bail Pending Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether special or exceptional circumstances existed under s 22 of the Bail Act 2013 to justify granting bail pending appeal.' "Whether the applicant's asserted prospects of success on appeal, remaining non-parole period, custody-related preparation difficulties, family circumstances, and alleged errors in earlier bail decisions constituted special or exceptional circumstances." "Whether the Crown had conceded that leave to appeal should be granted on Ground 5 of the applicant's appeal."]

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant did not establish special or exceptional circumstances under s 22 of the Bail Act 2013. The Crown had not conceded Ground 5; alleged errors in earlier bail decisions were irrelevant to a fresh application; the delay and possible expiry of the non-parole period largely resulted from the applicant's own adjournment request; and the Court was not persuaded that the applicant's prospects of success, alone or together with custody preparation difficulties and family circumstances, were sufficiently strong to meet the statutory threshold.

Court Disposition

Release application refused

Orders

  • ['Release application refused']