R v Lever, Peter Benjamin [2008] NSWDC 228

R v Lever, Peter Benjamin [2008] NSWDC 228

Although the applicant intended to return to Australia and the proposed delivery of medical supplies was bona fide, Bangkok was under a state of emergency and government travel advice described the situation as unpredictable with possible further disruptions to transport services and infrastructure. Because the Bail Act requires priority to be given to ensuring attendance at court, the court could not be sufficiently confident that circumstances would permit the applicant to return for trial, so the bail variation was refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Bail Application / Application to Vary Bail Conditions Before Trial
Outcome
Application to vary bail refused.
Legal Topics
['variation of Bail Conditions' 'temporary Return of Passport' 'travel Outside Jurisdiction' 'risk of Non Appearance' 'civil Unrest in Thailand']
['criminal Law' 'bail'] ['variation of Bail Conditions' 'temporary Return of Passport' 'travel Outside Jurisdiction' 'risk of Non Appearance' 'civil Unrest in Thailand']

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

Criminal Bail Application / Application to Vary Bail Conditions Before Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the accused's bail conditions should be varied to permit return of his passport and travel to Thailand to deliver medical supplies to the Mae Tao Clinic." "Whether the accused's liberty interests and humanitarian purpose outweighed concerns about ensuring his attendance at court in light of the situation in Thailand." 'Whether the possibility of disruption to transport services and infrastructure in Thailand created an unacceptable risk that the accused could not return for trial.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the applicant intended to return to Australia and the proposed delivery of medical supplies was bona fide, Bangkok was under a state of emergency and government travel advice described the situation as unpredictable with possible further disruptions to transport services and infrastructure. Because the Bail Act requires priority to be given to ensuring attendance at court, the court could not be sufficiently confident that circumstances would permit the applicant to return for trial, so the bail variation was refused.

Court Disposition

Application to vary bail refused.

Orders

  • ['The application is refused.' 'The judgment is to be made available as soon as possible.' 'Bail is to continue on its present terms.']