This is a case study about a bail application for a client charged with trafficking in a commercial quantity of drugs of dependence. Our client had previously been refused bail. Our lawyers then represented our client for another bail application which ultimately led to a successful outcome.
What is alleged to have occurred?
Our client was a young person living in greater Melbourne who was charged with two counts of trafficking a commercial quantity of drugs of dependence contrary to s71AA of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981, namely ketamine and cocaine. They were arrested and remanded in custody following a search warrant being executed at their home address.
This was the first time our client had been charged with a criminal offence and no one in their family had been involved in the criminal justice system before. The client’s parents had arrived in Australia as refugees and established a successful and happy life in Australia. They were supportive of the client being released from custody as soon as possible.
It must be noted that our client had been diagnosed with medical conditions including a severe allergy to nuts. This meant that time in custody was more stressful for the client than for other people who do not have these medical conditions. The client was determined to make an application for bail and be released into the community pending the finalisation of the criminal charges.
The client had applied for bail with the assistance of the duty solicitor on the first court date of the filing hearing, however they had been refused bail by the Magistrate on that occasion because some matters were not organised including the proposed residential address where the client would live while on bail. Our lawyers then engaged to assist the client with a bail application. They engaged with the client and his family, taking instructions, learning about the client’s life and background, putting plans into place for the bail application, including confirming an appropriate residential address and therapeutic and pro-social engagement in the community.
Our client’s family also set up appointments with medical specialists so that the client could seek treatment immediately upon release from custody. Our lawyers also analysed the brief of evidence and considered strategy for the bail application while keeping in mind the allegations and the case overall. The client was alleged to have been involved in a large sophisticated drug syndicate but was one of the people nominated by police as being ‘lower’ down and not one of the principal offenders.
What happened at court?
Sophie Parsons represented the client at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court on charges of Trafficking in a Drug or Drugs of Dependence – Commercial.
Written submissions were then prepared and documents were exchanged with the prosecution in support of the bail proposal, including the surety, before the date of the hearing, confirming that there was no objection to any of the materials. The prosecution informed our lawyers that the bail application was opposed on the grounds that our client must establish the existence of exceptional circumstances before being eligible for a grant of bail given the objective seriousness of the charges.
The prosecution also alleged that our client was an unacceptable risk of endangering the safety and welfare of the community as evident by illegal substances and other evidence found at the client’s home address, that the client may interfere with other witnesses or contact the co-accused, continue to traffick in a drug of dependence as a means to support themselves financially, and that they are a significant flight risk.
The bail application proceeded before a Magistrate in the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court. Our lawyers cross-examined the informant as to the issues alleged with respect to unacceptable risk, and made submissions that exceptional circumstances were established by a combination of factors notwithstanding the serious nature of the charges. These factors include the anticipated delay in preparing the prosecution case given the complexity of the allegations and number of co-accused, our client’s personal circumstances, and an absence of factors showing that our client was really an unacceptable risk in the manner alleged by prosecution. Our lawyers also made submissions about suitable bail conditions that could be imposed to ameliorate the risk alleged.
What was the result of the bail application for commercial trafficking of drugs ?
The Magistrate took some days to consider the decision, and ultimately granted our client bail with several conditions including a surety by way of bail guarantee. This was an excellent outcome for a bail application for commercial trafficking of drugs in the circumstances, particularly as none of the other co-accused in custody had yet been granted bail. It must also be noted that after the bail application was heard, the prosecution applied for an extension to time serve the full brief of evidence, causing the committal mention date to be adjourned because of the time the prosecution required to finalise extensive analysis of the evidence.
Our client being granted bail was the appropriate outcome in the circumstances and a real relief for our client and their family. The client subsequently complied with all bail conditions and, after a further period of time, successfully applied to vary their bail to reduce the onerous nature of the conditions. This time, because of the good level of compliance, the application to vary bail was made with the support of the prosecution.
Sophie Parsons
Sophie is a Partner at Doogue + George and is one of the firm's In-House Counsel and Trial Specialists. She is an experienced advocate who regularly appears in Victorian courts and tribunals and assists clients with advice and representation at every stage of proceedings.View Sophie Parsons' profile.
DISCLAIMER: This is a real case study of an actual case from our files. Details pertaining to the client have been changed to protect their privacy. The sentence imposed and the charge have not been altered. These case studies are published to demonstrate real outcomes and give an indication of possible tariffs in Court. We do not guarantee a similar case on these charges will get the same result. Please note that we post results at our discretion, therefore while many case studies are average results, others are notable for their exceptional outcomes. PUBLISHED 07/02/2025
