Mariam v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2015] NSWCCA 216

Mariam v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2015] NSWCCA 216

Although strict bail conditions were proposed, the Court was not satisfied that they would address the unacceptable risks identified. The allegations, if accepted, showed a preparedness to take significant measures to avoid criminal sanction; the circumstances of the alleged firearm possession, criminal history, parole non-compliance and apparent criminal associations supported a real concern of further serious offending; and there was a particular risk of interference with MK. Those matters amounted to unacceptable risks, with a lesser risk of failure to appear, so bail was refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Bail Release Application / Pending District Court Trial Listed for 28 September 2015
Outcome
Bail refused
Legal Topics
['possession of a Prohibited Pistol Without Authorisation' 'perverting the Course of Justice' 'unacceptable Risk Test' 'interference With Witnesses' 'risk of Serious Offending' 'failure to Appear']
['criminal Law' 'bail'] ['possession of a Prohibited Pistol Without Authorisation' 'perverting the Course of Justice' 'unacceptable Risk Test' 'interference With Witnesses' 'risk of Serious Offending' 'failure to Appear']

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 Release Application / Pending District Court Trial Listed for 28 September 2015

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be released on bail pending trial.' 'Whether there was an unacceptable risk that the applicant would fail to appear at proceedings.' 'Whether there was an unacceptable risk that the applicant would commit a serious offence.' 'Whether there was an unacceptable risk that the applicant would interfere with witnesses or evidence.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although strict bail conditions were proposed, the Court was not satisfied that they would address the unacceptable risks identified. The allegations, if accepted, showed a preparedness to take significant measures to avoid criminal sanction; the circumstances of the alleged firearm possession, criminal history, parole non-compliance and apparent criminal associations supported a real concern of further serious offending; and there was a particular risk of interference with MK. Those matters amounted to unacceptable risks, with a lesser risk of failure to appear, so bail was refused.

Court Disposition

Bail refused

Orders

  • ['Application for bail refused']