The Court of Appeal held that the primary judge materially erred in finding that a Youth Justice intensive bail program added 'little more' to a 17-year-old appellant's existing supports, where the program in fact offered substantial additional supervision, referrals, harm minimisation, family engagement through interpreters, and outreach services not otherwise available. Re-exercising the discretion, the Court found exceptional circumstances established and was not satisfied the prosecution had discharged its onus of proving unacceptable risk, given the appellant's age, limited criminal history, family and school support, willingness to engage with Youth Justice, absence of bail breaches, and the availability of strict bail conditions including curfew, non-association orders, and geographic exclusion. The Court also ordered bail monitoring, requiring the appellant to return to the trial division in approximately 14 days for a compliance update.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.