Bail — juvenile applicant — whether bail concerns give rise to an unacceptable risk — risk of failing to appear — risk of serious offences — strong Crown case — protective factors — Bail Casework 22C plan — long criminal history for similar offences — history of non-compliance with bail — breaches of bail occurred at proposed bail address — observations on Bail Act 2013, s 22C — relevant offence — motor theft offence — relevant young person — meaning of a high degree of confidence — release application refused.

Bail — release application — young person — 14 years old — concerning charges — further offence committed whilst on bail — Bail Act 2013, s 22C test — relevant offences — attempt to commit substantive offence is not a relevant offence — unacceptable risk test — bail granted with conditions.

Bail — Aboriginal youth — multiple offences — whether unacceptable risks can be ameliorated by proposed conditions — a number of services actively engaged with by RB — close to age 18 — application for some of his other offences (part heard) to be dealt with under s 31(3) of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 — s 22C commenced 3 April 2024 — applicability to the offending — Bail and Crimes Amendment Act 2024 — tension with Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act — unfairly discriminatory against a class of children accused of crimes — police letters — expressed in generalities rather than facts — police letters expressing opinions as to whether a person should be released — Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) v Mawad [2015] NSWCCA 227 at [33]–[34] and [38]–[39] s 22C does not apply as all alleged offending before s 22C commenced so no further relevant offence committed whilst on bail.

Applicant is 11-year-old Aboriginal child — offences of aggravated break, enter, and steal; armed robbery; larceny; destroying property; being carried in a conveyance without consent; and riot — present allegations committed while applicant subject to bail for a number of different charges — Juvenile Justice not able to provide formal supervision because applicant had not entered any pleas of guilty to the offences — distinction between “bail supervision” and “bail support” at [36]–[40] — essential that children who have a multiplicity of complex needs are provided with the support, supervision, and guidance they require in the community as opposed to having them detained in custody — service providers actively engaged — multiple underlying issues that need to be addressed — necessary to ensure that a suitably qualified individual coordinates the various services — Applicant released on bail with conditions.

Bail Act 2013 s 19(1) — applicant is a 14-year-old Aboriginal child — initially granted bail, then bail refused after further offending — Youth Justice can supervise a child on bail in the community where the child has pleaded not guilty to the offence — applicant has complex needs and vulnerabilities that are better treated and protected in the community — applicant has strong family and community ties — proposed bail conditions ameliorate risk of reoffending — conditional bail granted.

Applicant is 12 years old — offences of shoplifting, minor violence towards his carer, using lighters to damage property and allegation of breaking into a school and causing damage by fire — application is opposed by the Crown due to risk of nonappearance, risk of commission of a further serious offence and risk of danger to the victim, individuals and/or community — Bail Protocol, which prohibits supervision by Youth Justice of young people on bail unless there has been a plea of guilty or a finding of guilt, is not a necessary precondition to supervision on bail — appropriate that a young person with vulnerability should be supported and supervised intensively in the community rather than detained — bail granted.

Bail Act 2013 s 22B — defendant 14 years old at time of offences, now 16 years — pleaded guilty to child sexual assaults — no prior convictions — no drug and alcohol dependencies — Aboriginal background — bullied at school — father died when defendant 10 years, grandfather, a primary carer, died recently — sexual abuse as a child — court must consider three questions: s 22B Bail Act, whether it is “practically inevitable” that defendant will be the subject of full-time imprisonment when he is sentenced; whether there are special or exceptional circumstances that should not lead to immediate detention; whether there are any risks that are unacceptable and that cannot be ameliorated by conditions — not satisfied that full-time incarceration is practically inevitable — difficulty of attending grandfather’s funeral if defendant was in custody would constitute special circumstances — on bail for 2 years without further criminal conduct — essential precondition for engagement of s 22B Bail Act not established — detention application is refused — bail condition varied so defendant is not to be alone with any child under 13 years.

Bail Act 2013 ss 19, 22B — release application — applicant 16 years old — arrested for offence of armed robbery — applicant also faces charges of two counts of assault occasioning actual bodily harm; two counts of using an offensive weapon with attempt to commit an indictable offence of intimidation; four counts of damaging property; and one count of reckless wounding in company — court not satisfied, on balance of probabilities, that applicant will be sentenced to imprisonment to be served by full-time detention — test in s 22B does not apply — applicant must still satisfy unacceptable risk test under s 19 — charges reflect a large number of very serious allegations, repeatedly involving use of a knife — unacceptable risk of further serious offence — unacceptable risk of danger to community — bail refused.

Bail Act 2013 s 8(2) — appeal against bail determination — plaintiff 15 years old during original proceedings — pleaded guilty to counts of larceny, robbery, using an offensive weapon to commit an indictable offence, destroying or damaging property — bail granted — sentencing decision and bail variation application listed on same day — magistrate made finding of failure to comply with a bail condition after sentencing decision — Bail Act s 8(2) bail decision cannot be made if substantive proceedings for the offence have concluded and no further substantive proceedings are pending before a court — once sentences were handed down, magistrate ceased to have jurisdiction to determine whether plaintiff had failed to comply with bail — “bail decision” in s 8(2) is confined to 4 types of bail decisions listed in s 8(1) and, by extension, to a variation application, but it does not include the discrete determination of whether a person has failed to comply with a bail condition — magistrate applied incorrect standard of proof in making a failure to comply finding — jurisdictional error established — appeal upheld — order that plaintiff breached a condition of bail set aside.

Bail Act 2013 ss 22, 22B(1)(a) — bail sought after conviction for affray but before sentence — applicant in custody for 2 years 3 months and 16 days — at time of offending applicant aged 17 years — need to show special or exceptional circumstances if time he has presently served will or might not be less than the sentence that might be imposed upon him when he comes to be sentenced — non-parole period will probably not exceed time applicant has spent in custody on remand — special or exceptional circumstances shown — bail concern not an unacceptable risk — bail granted on conditions.

Application to delete curfew condition — 10-year-old applicant — no evidence of offending at night — bail conditions are calculated to mitigate risk — must be reasonably necessary, reasonable and proportionate, and no more onerous than necessary — should not be used to attempt social engineering or for paternalistic interventions — curfew condition deleted.

Bail application — youth aged 17 years with psychiatric issues and a history of making threats and self-harm — charged with intentionally doing an act in preparation for or planning a terrorist act — threatening posts on Facebook placed over a significant period of time — whether exceptional circumstances established — youth held to pose an unacceptable risk of committing a serious offence and endangering the safety of the community if released — bail refused.

Young offender was a school student 16 years old living with her mother and siblings — charged with an offence of collecting funds for, or on behalf of, a terrorist organisation — application for bail refused in the Children’s Court — rebuttable presumption against bail being granted to a person charged with a terrorism offence — exceptional circumstances to justify the granting of bail — youth of the applicant — vulnerability of youth to adult persuasion or influence — bail conditions can be imposed to appropriately address bail concerns.