Unit 4 - Bail (Blackstones Reading) PDF

Bail and remands ================ 1. adjournments and remands on bail and in custody 2. time limits applicable to remands in custody and applications for their extension (detailed knowledge of specific time limits not required) 3. the presumption in favour of bail and the occasions whe...

Bail and remands ================ 1. adjournments and remands on bail and in custody 2. time limits applicable to remands in custody and applications for their extension (detailed knowledge of specific time limits not required) 3. the presumption in favour of bail and the occasions when it does not apply; the statutory grounds for withholding bail, and the matters that have to be considered by the court 4. bail conditions that can be applied and under what circumstances 5. the procedure for making a bail application, the practice and procedure on further application to the Crown Court following a decision to refuse bail in the magistrates' court 6. grounds upon which the prosecution can appeal to the Crown Court against a decision to grant bail 7. dealing with defendants who have failed to surrender to bail or breached their bail conditions 1. [Power to Adjourn] D5.22 At any stage before the case is sent to the Crown Court for trial or before (or during) a summary trial, a magistrates\' court may adjourn the proceedings (see the MCA 1980, ss. 10 and 18, and D5.34). [Challenging Decisions on Adjournments ] D5.32 It is possible to challenge the grant or refusal of an adjournment by way of judicial review (see D29.25 et seq.). However, CrimPD 5.4.4 says that magistrates\' courts \'must not be deterred from aprompt and robust determination\' of applications to adjourn, adding that, as \'an exercise of discretion, the High Court will only interfere with a decision on adjournment if there are compelling reasons so to do\'. It follows that the High Court will be \'particularly slow\' to interfere with a decision to refuse an adjournment, given the discretionary nature of that decision (per Clarke J in R (CPS) v Uxbridge Magistrates \[2007\] EWHC 205 (Admin), at \[5\]). In DPP v Petrie \[2015\] EWHC 48 (Admin), Gross LJ said (at \[21\]) that the grant or refusal of an adjournment \'is a paradigm example of a discretionary case management decision where an appeal ought only to succeed on well-recognised but limited grounds (for example, error of principle, error of law or where the decision can properly be characterised as plainly wrong)\'. [Statutory Provisions on Power to adjourn] - MCA 1980, ss10(1) and 18(4) 10 - 1. A magistrates\' court may at any time, whether before or after beginning to try an information, adjourn the trial, and may do so, notwithstanding anything in this Act, when composed of a single justice. 18 - (4)     A magistrates\' court proceeding under sections 19 to 23 below may adjourn the proceedings at any time, and on doing so on any occasion when the accused is present may remand the accused, and shall remand him if---  (a)     on the occasion on which he first appeared, or was brought, before the court to answer to the information he was in custody or, having been released on bail, surrendered to the custody of the court; or  (b)     he has been remanded at any time in the course of proceedings on the information; [Remanding the accused on adjournments ] D5.35 The MCA 1980, s. 128(1), provides that, whenever a magistrates\' court has power to remand a person, it may either remand in custody or remand on bail, in accordance with the BA 1976. Section 18 governs adjournments until allocation (mode of trial) has been determined. Section 10 applies to appearances for summary offences up until conviction, and to appearances for either way offences from after mode of trial has been determined in favour of summary trial to conviction. Sections 10(4) and 18(4) provide (in almost identical terms) that, on adjourning proceedings for an either way offence, the court must remand the accused (on bail or in custody) unless the accused: 2. D5.36 [Periods of remand in custody] The maximum period for which a magistrates\' court may remand an accused in custody is \'eight clear days\' (MCA 1980, s. 128(6)). This is subject to the following exceptions: D5.37 [Further Remands ] A person who is brought before the court after an earlier remand may be remanded again (MCA1980, s. 128(3)). Thus, there maybe several remand hearings before the case is sent to the Crown Court or the commencement of summary trial. The only limitation on the number of remands is the general discretion of magistrates to refuse an adjournment if it would be against the interests of justice (e.g., because they consider that the party requesting the adjournment should have been ready to proceed on the present occasion). [Remand on Bail] D5.41 Under the MCA 1980, s. 128(6)(a), the accused may be remanded for a period greater than eight clear days if the remand is on bail and both the accused and the prosecution agree to a longer period of remand. [Custody time limits ] D15.7 **Section 22 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985** (set out at D15.38) the Secretary of State to make regulations fixing:  (a)     the maximum period available to the prosecution to complete any preliminary (pre-trial) stage of proceedings for an offence; and/or  (b)     the maximum period for which an accused may be kept in custody while awaiting completion of such a stage. [Periods Applicable ] D15.8 The regulations may prescribe an overall time-limit within which the prosecution must complete the stage of the proceedings in question (Prosecution of Offences Act 1985, s. 22(1)(a)). Alternatively or additionally, the regulations may prescribe a custody time-limit, that being the maximum period for which the accused may be remanded in custody while the stage is being completed (s. 22(1)(b)). D15.9 [Time-limits ] The regulations in question, the **Prosecution of Offences (Custody Time Limits) Regulations 1987** (SI 1987 No. 299), only impose custody time-limits. These are as follows: a. Between first appearance and committal. a. By reg. 4(2) and (4), the maximum period for which an accused charged with an indictable offence may be held in the custody of the magistrates\' court between first appearance and committal proceedings is 70 days.  b. Between first appearance and summary trial. b. If the offence is triable either way and the court determines to try the case summarily, the maximum period in custody between first appearance and the court beginning to hear evidence for the prosecution is again 70 days, unless the decision for summary trial is taken within 56 days, in which case the limit is reduced to 56 days (reg. 4(2) and (3)). In the case of a summary offence, the maximum period is 56 days (reg. 4(4A)).  c. Between committal and trial on indictment. c. By reg. 5(3)(a), the maximum period for which an accused committed for trial to the Crown Court may be held in custody between \'committal\' and the start of trial is 112 days.  d. Multiple committals. d. If a single indictment is preferred containing counts in respect of which the accused was committed for trial on two or more different occasions, the 112-day limit applies separately in relation to each offence (reg. 6(4)). See also D15.10.  e. Section 51 sending. e. Where the accused has been sent for trial under the CDA 1998, s. 51, the maximum period is 182 days between the **date on which the accused is sent to the Crown Court and the start of the trial**. From this maximum must be deducted any period during which the accused was held in custody by the magistrates (reg. 5(6B)).  f. Retrial directed by the Court of Appeal. f. Where an indictment is preferred by direction of the Court of Appeal, following the ordering of a retrial, the 112-day limit applies from that preferment (reg. 5(2)(b) and (3)(b)). See also Leeds Crown Court, ex parte Whitehead (17 June 1999 unreported, DC).  g. Voluntary bill. g. Where proceedings are by way of a voluntary bill of indictment the 112-day period runs from the date of preferment of the bill (reg. 5(3)(b)). [Effect of EXPIRY of a custody time-limit] D15.18 If a custody time-limit expires before completion of the stage of proceedings in question, the accused must be granted bail, in relation at least to the offence to which the limit relates. This is made clear by reg. 6(6), which states that, where the Crown Court is notified that the 112-day time-limit between \'committal\' and the start of the trial is about to expire in a certain case, it must bail the accused as from the expiry of the limit, subject to a duty to attend for trial. [Procedure for seeking an extension of time-limits ] D15.33 At any time before the expiry of a time-limit, the Crown Court, if the accused has already been committed for trial, or the magistrates\' court, in other cases, may extend the limit if satisfied of two matters (Prosecution of Offences Act 1985, s. 22(3)):  (a)     that \'the prosecution has acted with all due diligence and expedition\', and  (b)     that there is \'good and sufficient cause for doing so\'. Instances of \'good and sufficient cause\' are given in s. 22(3)(a)(i) and (ii), but they are clearly meant to be no more than examples. An already extended limit may be further extended (s. 22(3)). 3. D7.1 Bail in criminal proceedings is governed by the Bail Act 1976 (BA 1976) (see s. 1(6) of the Act). \'Bail in criminal proceedings\' is defined in s. 1(1) of the Act as: \'(a) bail grantable in or in connection with proceedings for an offence to a person who is accused or convicted of the offence, or (b) bail grantable in connection with an offence to a person who is under arrest for the offence or for whose arrest for the offence a warrant (endorsed for bail) is being issued\' [Courts' power to grant bail: bail by magistrates' court] Under the MCA 1980, s. 128(1), a remand by a magistrates\' court may be in custody or on bail, in accordance with the BA 1976. Where a magistrates\' court sends an accused to the Crown Court for trial under the CDA 1998, s. 51, the accused may be kept in custody or released on bail (see D10). Similarly, committals for sentence may be in custody or on bail. Where a magistrates\' court has summarily convicted an accused and passed a custodial sentence, it may grant bail pending the determination of an appeal to the Crown Court or to the Administrative Court by way of case stated (MCA 1980, s. 113). The CAJA 2009, s. 115, provides that a person charged with murder may not be granted bail except by order of a Crown Court judge (see D7.4). [Courts' power to grant bail: bail by crown court] D7.3 Under the Senior Courts Act 1981, s. 81(1)(a) to (g), the Crown Court may grant bail to any person: All the above powers are subject to the CJPO 1994, s. 25 (see D7.8). D7.4 [Bail Jurisdiction in Murder Cases ] The CAJA 2009, s. 115(1), provides that a person charged with murder may not be granted bail except by order of a Crown Court judge. A person who appears before a magistrates\' court charged with murder must be committed (in custody) to the Crown Court (s. 115(4)). A Crown Court judge must then make a decision about bail as soon as reasonably practicable and, in any event, within the period of 48 hours (excluding weekends and public holidays) beginning with the day after the day on which the person appears before the magistrates\' court (s. 115(3)). [Principles Governing Bail: Presumption in favour of bail ] D7.6 **Section 4(1) of the BA 1976**, together with sch. 1 (see D7.142), creates a rebuttable presumption in favour of bail (sometimes referred to, somewhat inaccurately, as a \'right to bail\'). It provides that: \'A person to whom this section applies shall be granted bail except as provided in Schedule 1 to this Act\'. **Apart from cases** where the **accused has been convicted and the hearing has been adjourned** for pre-sentence reports, s. 4(1) does not apply once a person has been convicted of an offence (as is made clear in the proviso to s. 4(2)). Therefore, an appellant seeking bail pending determination of an appeal against conviction and/or sentence cannot rely on the presumption in favour of bail. Neither can an offender who is committed to the Crown Court for sentence following conviction in a magistrates\' court. In both those situations, there is power to grant bail, but its grant or refusal is entirely at the discretion of the court. [Bail following indication of guilty plea at 'plea before venue' hearing ] D7.7 In Rafferty \[1999\] 1 Cr App R 235, the Court of Appeal dealt with the position where an accused enters a guilty plea at the \'plea before venue\' procedure (see D6.12 et seq.), and is then committed for sentence to the Crown Court. Thomas J said (at p. 237) that, in most such cases, it would not be usual to alter the position as regards bail or custody. When a person who had been on bail pleads guilty at the plea before venue, the usual practice should be to continue bail, even if it is anticipated that a custodial sentence will be imposed by the Crown Court, unless there are good reasons for remanding the accused in custody. If the accused is in custody, then it would be unusual, if the reasons for the remand in custody remain unchanged, to alter the position. [Exceptions to the presumption in favour of bail: No bail for homicide or rape if previous conviction] D7.8 Under the CJPO 1994, s. 25 (see D7.10), the court may not grant bail to an accused who is charged with (or has been convicted of) murder, attempted murder, manslaughter, rape or attempted rape, or certain other offences under the SOA 2003, if the accused has been convicted of any of these offences (or culpable homicide) in the past, unless it is of the opinion that there are exceptional circumstances which justify it. In a case where the previous conviction was for manslaughter, the restriction applies only if the accused received a custodial sentence for that offence. \'Conviction\' is widely defined to include a finding that the defendant was not guilty by reason of insanity, or was found to have done the act or made the omission charged in a case where the defendant was unfit to plead. Previous convictions in EU Member States are treated as being relevant previous convictions if the corresponding offences in the UK would be so treated. [Murder] Under the BA 1976, sch. 1, part I, para. 6ZA, an accused who is charged with murder may not be granted bail unless the court is of the opinion that there is no significant risk that the accused will, if released on bail, commit an offence that would, or would be likely to, cause physical or mental injury to any other person. Again, the presumption in favour of bail is effectively reversed. **[Refusing bail to an accused: Charged with an indictable offence]** D7.12 Part I of sch. 1 to the 1976 Act sets out the circumstances in which an accused may be refused bail if charged with (or awaiting sentence for) at least one offence that is triable on indictment and punishable with imprisonment. An unconvicted accused charged with an offence which is imprisonable and triable on indictment need not be granted bail if one or more of the grounds for a remand in custody (listed in the BA 1976, sch. 1, part I, paras. 2 to 6A) is applicable. [Risk of absconding, further offences, or interference with witnesses] Bail Act 1976, sch. 1, para. 2 1. The defendant need not be granted bail if the court is satisfied that there are substantial grounds for believing that the defendant, if released on bail (whether subject to conditions or not) would--- a. fail to surrender to custody, or b. commit an offence while on bail, or  c. interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct the course of justice, whether in relation to himself or any other person. [Standard of proof] D7.14 Standard of Proof The opening words of para. 2(1) do not require the court to be satisfied that the consequences specified in subparagraphs (a) to (c) will in fact occur in the event of bail being granted, or even to be satisfied that they are more likely than not to occur. The court must merely be satisfied that there are \'substantial grounds for believing\' that they would occur. [No real prospect of a custodial sentence ] D7.16 Paragraph 1A of sch. 1 provides that para. 2 does not apply where the accused has attained the age of 18, and has not been convicted of an offence in those proceedings, and it appears to the court that there is no real prospect that the accused will be sentenced to a custodial sentence in the proceedings. In such a case, bail cannot be withheld on any of the grounds set out in para. 2. [Relevant facts ] D7.17 Relevant Factors Certain factors to which the court should have regard when taking a decision under para. 2 are listed in para. 9. These factors are:  (a)     the nature and seriousness of the offence and the probable method of dealing with the offender for it (see D7.18);  (b)     the character, antecedents, associations and community ties of the accused (see D7.19 and D7.20);  (c)     the accused\'s \'record\' for having answered bail in the past (see D7.21);  (d)     the strength of the evidence against the accused (see D7.22); and  (e)     if the court is satisfied that there are substantial grounds for believing that the accused would commit an offence while on bail, the risk that the accused may engage in conduct likely to cause physical or mental injury to anyone else (see D7.23). D7.18 Nature and seriousness of offence (para. 9(a)). The relevance of the offence alleged being serious is that the accused will know that, if convicted, a severe sentence is likely, and it will therefore be tempting to abscond rather than run the risk of such a sentence. D7.19 Character and antecedents (para. 9(b)). This refers primarily to previous convictions. These may make a custodial sentence more likely (especially if the accused, if convicted of the present offence, will be in breach of a suspended sentence of imprisonment). Moreover, a person of previous good character is more likely to be trusted by the courts than one with a criminal record. D7.20 Associations and community ties (para. 9(b)). The word \'associations\' is generally taken to refer to undesirable friends with criminal records. Examining the \'community ties\' of the accused involves looking at how easy it would be to abscond and how much the accused has to lose by absconding. In accused of \'no fixed abode\' or living in short-term accommodation is not automatically debarred from bail, but the ease of disappearing to another address is a factor to be considered. D7.21 Bail record (para. 9(c)). Considering the bail record of the accused requires the court to consider whether the accused has absconded in the past. D7.22 Strength of the prosecution evidence (para. 9(d)). This is relevant to whether an accused would answer bail, in the sense that one who knows there is a good chance of being acquitted is less likely to abscond than one who anticipates almost certain conviction. D7.23 Risk of injury to someone else (para. 9(e)). Where the court is satisfied that there are substantial grounds for believing that the accused would commit an offence while on bail, the court considers whether that offence is likely to cause physical or mental injury to any other person. [OTHER GROUNDS TO WITHOLD BAIL ] D7.24 Part I of sch. 1 to the BA 1976 (see D7.151 et seq.) sets out other grounds for withholding bail. D7.25 Domestic Violence: Risk to an \'Associated Person\' By virtue of para. 2ZA, the accused need not be granted bail if the court is satisfied that there are substantial grounds for believing that, if released on bail, the accused would commit an offence while on bail by engaging in conduct that would, or would be likely to, cause physical or mental injury to an associated person, or else cause such a person to fear such injury. For this purpose, an \'associated person\' is a person who is associated with the accused within the meaning of the Family Law Act 1996, s. 62(3) (the definition includes people who are or have been married to each other, or who are or have been civil partners; cohabitants or former cohabitants; people who live or have lived in the same household, otherwise than as an employee, tenant, lodger or boarder; relatives; people who have or have had an intimate personal relationship with each other which is or was of significant duration; and in relation to any child, a parent or person who has or has had parental responsibility for the child). D7.26 Accused Already on Bail Under para. 2A, the accused need not be granted bail if it appears to the court that the accused was on bail in respect of another offence on the date of the current offence. However, by virtue of para. 1A, para. 2A does not apply where the accused has attained the age of 18, and has not been convicted of an offence in the current proceedings, and it appears to the court that there is no real prospect that the accused will be sentenced to a custodial sentence in the proceedings. D7.27 Own Protection Under para. 3, the accused need not be granted bail if the court is satisfied that remaining in custody would be for the accused\'s own protection. This will (for example) cover cases where the offence alleged has caused anger in the area where it was committed and there is a risk of members of the public exacting retribution on the person believed to be responsible. Where the accused is a child or young person, bail may be refused under para. 3 if the accused should be kept in custody \'for his own welfare\'. D7.28 Already in Custody Under para. 4, the accused need not be granted bail if already serving a custodial sentence. Paragraph 4 applies only if the accused is in custody pursuant to a sentence, not when in custody as a result of a remand in other proceedings that are currently outstanding. D7.29 Insufficient Time Under para. 5, the accused need not be granted bail if the court is satisfied that, owing to lack of time since the commencement of the proceedings, it has not been practicable to obtain sufficient information for the purposes of taking the decision on bail. In such cases, the court might remand in custody (possibly for a shorter than usual period) to enable the necessary information to be discovered. D7.30 Absconded in the Present Proceedings Under para. 6, the accused need not be granted bail if arrested under the BA 1976, s. 7, having previously been released on bail in connection with the current proceedings (see D7.147). [REFUSING BAIL to an ACCUSED CHARGED WITH SUMMARY and NON-IMPRISONABLE OFFENCES:] [Imprisonable Summary Offences] D7.35 Under the BA 1976, sch. 1, part I, para. 1(2) (see D7.151), where the offence is a summary offence punishable with imprisonment, or an offence to which the MCA 1980, s. 22, applies (criminal damage where the value involved does not exceed £5,000), part I of sch. 1 does not apply. In such cases, the BA 1976, sch. 1, part IA, applies instead (see D7.158 et seq.). Under part IA, the exceptions to the presumption in favour of bail are as follows: a. accused previously granted bail and failed to surrender to custody in those proceedings & court believes that accused would, if released on bail, fail to surrender to custody (para 2) b. where accused was on bail on the date of the current alleged offence & court satisfied substantial grounds for believing that, if released on bail, accused would commit an offence on bail (para 3) c. court satisfied substantial grounds for believing that, if released on bail, accused would commit an offence while on bail by engaging in conduct that would, or would be likely to, cause physical or mental injury to an associated person (as defined by the Family Law Act 1996, s. 62, see D7.25), or cause such a person to fear physical or mental injury, i.e. domestic violence (para. 4) d. here the court is satisfied that the accused should be kept in custody for the accused\'s own protection (or welfare, if a child or young person) (para. 5) e. where the accused is already serving a custodial sentence (para. 6) f. here the accused has been arrested under the BA 1976, s. 7, and the court is satisfied that there are substantial grounds for believing that, if released on bail, the accused would fail to surrender to custody, commit an offence while on bail or interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct the course of justice (para. 7) g. where the court is satisfied that it has not been practicable to obtain sufficient information for the purpose of taking the decision on whether to grant bail for want of time since the institution of the proceedings (para. 8) D7.36 No Real Prospect of a Custodial Sentence The BA 1976, sch. 1, part IA, para. 1A, provides that para. 2 (failure to surrender to custody), para. 3 (committing offences while on bail) and para. 7 (accused arrested under s. 7) **do not apply** where the accused has attained the age of 18, and has not been convicted of an offence in the proceedings, and it appears to the court that there is \'no real prospect that the defendant will be sentenced to a custodial sentence in the proceedings\'. [Non-imprisonable offences] D7.37 Part II of sch. 1 to the BA 1976 (see D7.161 et seq.) sets out the reasons which permit the refusal of bail to an accused charged solely with one or more offences that are not punishable with imprisonment. The grounds for withholding bail in such cases are as follows: a. where the accused is under the age of 18 or has been convicted of an offence in those proceedings and (in either case), having been previously granted bail in criminal proceedings, has failed to surrender to custody and the court believes, in view of that failure, that the accused would fail to surrender to custody (para. 2) b. where the court is satisfied that the accused should be kept in custody for his or her own protection (or welfare, if a child or young person) (para. 3);  c. where the accused is already serving a custodial sentence (para. 4);  d. where the accused is under the age of 18 or has been convicted of an offence in those proceedings, and (in either case) has been arrested under the BA 1976, s. 7, and the court is satisfied that there are substantial grounds to believe that the accused would fail to surrender to custody, commit an offence on bail, or interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct the course of justice (para. 5);  e. where the accused has been arrested under s. 7 and the court is satisfied that there are substantial grounds for believing that, if released on bail, the accused would commit an offence while on bail by engaging in conduct that would, or would be likely to, cause physical or mental injury to an associated person 4. [Conditions of Bail ] D7.45 Where the court grants \'unconditional\' bail, the accused has simply to surrender to custody (i.e. attend court) at the date and time specified (s. 3(1)). However, the court may impose a wide range of additional requirements by granting bail subject to specific conditions, known as \'conditional bail\' (s. 3(6)). [Duty to surrender to custody ] D7.46 A person granted bail in criminal proceedings is under a duty to surrender to custody (BA 1976, s. 3(1)). \'Surrender to custody\' is defined in s. 2(2) as surrendering into the custody of the court the accused has been bailed to attend. Failure without reasonable cause to surrender to custody is an offence under the BA 1976, s. 6 (see D7.110). [Conditions that may be imposed by the court] D7.47 By virtue of the BA 1976, s. 3(6) (see D7.136), a person who is granted bail may be required by the court to comply with such requirements as appear to the court necessary to secure that the person:  (a)     surrenders to custody;  (b)     does not commit an offence on bail;  (c)     does not interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct the course of justice;  (d)     is available for the making of inquiries or a report to assist in sentencing (this condition may be imposed only it appears to be necessary to do so for the purpose of enabling inquiries or a report to be made: sch. 1, part I, para. 8(1A)); and f. attends an interview with a legal representative (this will nearly always be a solicitor). Conditions may also be imposed for the protection of the accused (or, if a child or young person, for the accused\'s own welfare or interests). D7.48 The BA 1976, sch. 1, part I, para. 8(1), provides that no conditions may be imposed unless it appears to the court that it is \'necessary\' to do so either (a) for the purpose of preventing the occurrence of any of the events mentioned in sch. 1, para. 2(1), or for the accused\'s own protection or, if a child or young person, for the accused\'s own welfare or interests. D7.49 Under CrimPR 14.5(4) (see Supplement, R14.5) a prosecutor who wants the court to impose a condition must specify the condition and explain what purpose it would serve. Commonly imposed conditions include: a. a condition of residence, often expressed as a condition that the accused is to live and sleep at a specified address;  b. a condition that the accused is to notify any changes of address to the police;  c. a condition of reporting (whether daily, weekly or at other intervals) to a local police station; d. a curfew (i.e. the accused must be at a specified address between certain hours);  e. a condition that the accused is not to enter a certain area or building or go within a specified distance of a certain address;  f. a condition that the accused is not to contact (whether directly or indirectly) the victim of the alleged offence and/or any other probable prosecution witness; and  g. a condition that the accused\'s passport must be surrendered to the police (sometimes with an additional restriction to prevent the accused from applying for travel documents). [Electronic Monitoring] D7.51 Electronic monitoring (colloquially known as \'tagging\') is available as a condition of bail under the BA 1976, s. 3(6ZAA). This condition is often combined with a curfew condition. [Sureties] D7.55 A person granted bail in criminal proceedings may be required, before release on bail, to provide one or more sureties to secure the person\'s surrender to custody (BA 1976, s. 3(4), see D7.136). Section 3(4) does not place any fetter on the discretion to demand a surety (cf. s. 3(6)). However, sch. 1, part I, para. 8, provides that no conditions shall be imposed under, inter alia, s. 3(4) unless they appear to the court necessary to prevent the occurrence of any of the events mentioned in sch. 1, part I, para. 2(1) (i.e. failure to surrender to custody, the commission of one or more offences while on bail, or interference with witnesses or obstruction of the course of justice). In R (Shea) v Winchester Crown Court \[2013\] EWHC 1050 (Admin), the Divisional Court ruled that there is no power (under the BA 1976 or otherwise) to require a surety to ensure no further offending: a surety can be sought only for the purpose of securing surrender to custody, and not for any other purpose. [Deposit of Security ] D7.60 Under the BA 1976, s. 3(2) (see D7.136), a person cannot stand as surety for him or herself. However, persons granted bail may be required to give \'security\' for their surrender to custody, i.e. deposit with the court money or some other valuable item which will be liable to forfeiture in the event of non-attendance in answer to bail (BA 1976, s. 3(5)). As with sureties, security may be required as a condition of bail only if it is considered necessary to prevent absconding. Where security has been given in pursuance of s. 3(5) and the person bailed absconds, the court may, unless there appears to have been reasonable cause for the failure to surrender to custody, order forfeiture of the security (s. 5(7) to (9)). [Application to vary the conditions of bail] D7.65 Where bail has been granted subject to conditions, the accused may apply for the conditions to be varied (BA 1976, s. 3(8)(a)). The application should be made to the court which granted bail or, where the accused has been sent to the Crown Court for trial, or committed to the Crown Court for sentence, to the Crown Court. A party who intends to apply for a variation of bail conditions must give advance notice to the court and to the other party, explaining what is sought and why. CrimPR 14.7 applies to such applications. The court may determine an application to vary a condition without a hearing if the variation has been agreed by the parties (r. 14.7(7)(c)); if there is to be a hearing, it should take place no later than the fifth business day after the application was served (r. 14.7(6)(b)). Although the BA 1976, s. 5(3), which requires the court to give reasons for specified bail decisions (see D7.76), does not expressly impose a duty to give reasons for a decision refusing to vary bail conditions, the common law requires that reasons for such a refusal must be \'legally adequate\' (R (Hussain) v Crown Court at Leeds \[2023\] EWHC 64 (Admin), per Fordham J at \[15\]). [Breach of bail conditions] D7.66 Breach of any condition which has been imposed may result in the accused being arrested without warrant under the BA 1976, s. 7(3), and bail being withdrawn. See D7.102. 5. [Procedure for bail applications in the Magistrates Courts: APPLICATION PROCEDURE] D7.67 A bail application is to be regarded as a preliminary hearing for the purposes of the CJA2003, s. 51, and so the court may direct attendance through a live audio link or live video link. Guidance on the procedure to be followed for bail applications is contained in CrimPR Part 14 (see Supplement, R14.1 et seq.). Rule 14.2(1)(a) states that a decision on bail cannot be made unless each party (and any surety directly affected by the decision) is present (in person or via live link) or has had an opportunity to make representations. However, where the accused is in custody, bail may be considered in the absence of an accused who has waived the right to attend, or who was present when bail was refused on a previous occasion and who has been in custody continuously since then (r. 14.2(1)(b)). Assuming the presumption in favour of bail applies by virtue of the BA 1976, s. 4(1), the onus is on the court to justify any refusal of bail in accordance with sch. 1 to the Act. D7.68 The question of bail is always a matter for the court. However, when adjourning the case of an unconvicted accused to whom s. 4(1) applies and who is entitled to make an argued bail application under sch. 1, part IIA (see D7.70), normal practice is to ask the prosecution if they have any objections to bail. The justices will normally be told of the accused\'s previous convictions (including any convictions for failure to surrender to custody) when the prosecution give their objections to bail. Following the prosecution objections, the defence representative (or the accused in person if unrepresented) may present the arguments for bail (whether conditional or unconditional). Where the prosecution oppose bail, the prosecutor is required to specify each statutory exception to the presumption in favour of bail on which the prosecution rely, and each consideration the prosecution argue to be relevant (r. 14.5(3)). There is no requirement for formal evidence to be given (Re Moles \[1981\] Crim LR 170; Mansfield JJ, ex parte Sharkey \[1985\] QB 613 at p. 626, per Lord Lane CJ). Either party may, however, adduce evidence in support of their respective arguments, e.g., a police officer to substantiate the objections to bail, or proposed sureties to further the application for bail. The prosecution will not normally reply to the application for bail by the defence. However, the prosecutor does have a right to reply to the defence submissions if this is necessary to correct alleged mis-statements of fact in what the defence have said (Isleworth Crown Court, ex parte Commissioner of Customs and Excise \[1990\] Crim LR 859). [Mags -- Right to make REPEATED ARGUED Bail applications ] D7.70 An accused who has been remanded in custody may make a fully argued application at the next hearing, regardless of whether that application repeats arguments that were placed before the previous bench (BA 1976, sch. 1, part IIA, para. 2; see D7.163). Unless the accused consents to being remanded while absent, the next hearing will take place within eight clear days (MCA 1980, s. 128(6)). However, should that second argued application fail, the BA 1976, sch. 1, part IIA, para. 3, is applicable. This provides that, at subsequent hearings, the court \'need not hear arguments as to fact or law which it has heard previously\'. This is so even though at each hearing the court should nominally consider whether the accused ought to remain in custody (sch. 1, part IIA, para. 1) The Law Commission Paper, Bail and the Human Rights Act 1998 (Law Com No. 269), contains guidance aiming to ensure that the provisions relating to a change in circumstances are applied in a way that is compatible with the ECHR. This guidance states (at paras. 12.23 and 13.33) that courts should be willing, at regular intervals of 28 days, to consider arguments that the passage of time constitutes, in the particular case before the court, a change in circumstances so as to require full argument. If the court finds that the passage of time does amount to a relevant changed circumstance, or that there are other circumstances which may be relevant to the need to detain the accused that have changed or come to notice since the last fully argued bail hearing, then a full bail application should follow in which all the arguments, old and new, could be put forward and taken into account. [Stating and recording decisions about bail -- CERTIFICATES OF FULL ARGUMENT] D7.78 Section 5(6A) to (6C) of the BA 1976 deal with certificates of full argument. Section 5(6A) applies where a magistrates\' court adjourns a case under the PCC(S)A2000, s. 11, or the CDA 1998, s. 52(5), or the MCA 1980, s. 10, 17C, 18 or 24C, and remands the accused in custody after hearing a fully-argued bail application (s. 5(6A)(a)). In such a case, the court must issue a certificate confirming that full argument was heard if either the court has not previously heard full argument on a bail application made by the accused in the proceedings in question, or it has previously heard such argument but is satisfied that there has been a change in circumstances or that new considerations have been placed before it (s. 5(6A)(b)). In a case where the court has heard a second or subsequent fully argued application on the basis of a change in circumstances or new considerations, the certificate must state what the change was (s. 5(6B)). The accused must be given a copy of the certificate (s. 5(6C)). The significance of the issue of a certificate of full argument is that the right to apply to the Crown Court for bail is dependent on it (Senior Courts Act 1981, s. 81(1)(g) and (1J)). [Options open to an accused remanded in custody or on conditional bail by Magistrates] D7.80 An accused who has been refused bail by a magistrates\' court may apply for bail to the Crown Court. An appeal can also be made against a decision of a magistrates\' court to impose conditions on bail. [Notice of Appeal ] D7.83 CrimPR 14.8 (see Supplement, R14.8) applies when the accused wants to apply to the Crown Court for bail after bail has been withheld by a magistrates\' court or to appeal to the Crown Court after a magistrates\' court has refused an application by the accused (under the BA 1976, s. 3(8)(a)) to vary a condition of bail (r. 14.8(1)). Written notice (using the prescribed form) of the intention to make the application must be given to the magistrates\' court, the Crown Court and the prosecutor (and any surety affected or proposed) as soon as reasonably practicable after the decision of the magistrates\' court (r. 14.8(2)). The notice must explain why bail should not be withheld, or why the condition of bail under appeal should be varied Unless the Crown Court directs otherwise, the application or appeal should be heard no later than the business day after notice of the application or appeal was served (r. 14.8(6)). [Procedure for bail applications in the Crown Court: THE HEARING] D7.84 The hearing follows the pattern of a bail application in the magistrates\' court, with counsel for the prosecution summarising the objections to bail and counsel for the applicant responding to those objections. If bail is granted to an accused who was refused it by magistrates at a remand hearing, the Crown Court may direct the accused to appear \'at a time and place which the magistrates\' court could have directed\' and the recognizance of any surety shall be conditioned accordingly (Senior Courts Act 1981, s. 81(1H)). [Repeated bail applications in the crown court ] D7.86 Part IIA of sch. 1 to the BA 1976 (see D7.70) applies to bail applications in the Crown Court just as it applies to applications before the magistrates. Therefore, if one application for bail has already been made to the Crown Court, a further argued application may not be presented unless there are fresh arguments or considerations to put before the court. 6. [Prosecution Applications Relating to Bail: Prosecution Right of Appeal against Decision to Grant Bail] D7.92 The Bail (Amendment) Act 1993 (see D7.165) confers upon the prosecution the right to appeal (i) to the Crown Court against a decision by a magistrates\' court to grant bail (s. 1(1)), and (ii) to appeal to the High Court when the Crown Court grants bail other than in the context of an appeal against the grant of bail by a magistrates\' court under s. 1(1) (s. 1(1B) and (1C)). Under s. 1(1) to (3), this right is limited to cases where:  (a)     the accused is charged with, or convicted of, an offence which is (or would be in the case of an adult) punishable by imprisonment; and  (b)     the prosecution is conducted by or on behalf of the DPP (this includes prosecutions conducted by the CPS)... (c)     before bail was granted, the prosecution made representations that bail should not be granted. [Prosecution Applications Relating to Bail: PROCEDURE ] D7.93 The Bail (Amendment) Act 1993 (see D7.165) and CrimPR 14.9 (see Supplement, R14.9) lay down the procedural requirements with which the prosecution must comply in order to exercise its right. First, they must give oral notice of appeal at the conclusion of the proceedings in which bail was granted, and before the accused is released from custody (s. 1(4) of the 1993 Act). Following the oral notice of appeal, the accused must be remanded in custody until the appeal is determined or otherwise disposed of (s. 1(6)). The oral notice given under s. 1(4) must be confirmed in writing, served on the court and the accused within two hours after the conclusion of the proceedings (s. 1(5)) The appeal must be heard (by the Crown Court or the High Court, as the case may be) within 48 hours, excluding weekends and public holidays (s. 1(8)). In Middlesex Guildhall Crown Court, ex parte Okoli \[2001\] 1 Cr App R 1, the Divisional Court construed this as meaning that the appeal hearing must commence within two working days of the date of the decision to grant bail. The Court rejected the contention that the appeal had to commence literally within 48 hours of the moment upon which oral notice had been given. 7. [Failure to comply with bail ] D7.97 Where an accused who has been granted bail in criminal proceedings fails to comply with the obligations imposed thereby, two main questions arise. The first is how the court should ensure that the accused will attend court for the remaining stages of the proceedings; the second is how the accused (and any sureties) will be dealt with in consequence of the breach of bail. [Powers of the court when a bailed accused fails to appear] D7.98 1. The court may issue an arrest warrant (often called a \'bench warrant\'), under the BA 1976, s. 7(1). a. The usual form of warrant simply orders that the accused be arrested and brought to court. b. However, at the court\'s discretion, the warrant may be \'backed for bail\' (see D7.99), either with or without a requirement for sureties. 2. A magistrates\' court may adjourn and extend the accused\'s bail under the MCA 1980, s. 129 (see D7.73). c. Similarly, the Crown Court, in appropriate cases, may simply order that the case be stood out of the list and take no further action in respect of the accused d. Such a course of action is appropriate only where the court is satisfied that there is a good reason for the accused\'s non-attendance (e.g., a doctor\'s certificate has been sent to the court indicating that the accused is unfit to attend). 3.  It may be possible to proceed in the absence of the accused e. (though it should be borne in mind that if the offence is triable either way, a magistrates\' court may try the case only with the consent of the accused, and that consent must be given at a hearing at which the accused is present unless the court is satisfied that there is a good reason for absence and the accused is represented by a lawyer who consents to summary trial on behalf of the accused) [BREACH OF BAIL CONDITIONS ] D7.102 Under s. 7(3) of the BA 1976, where an accused has been bailed to attend a court, a police officer may arrest the accused without warrant prior to the surrender date if: Following arrest under s. 7(3), s. 7(4) stipulates that the person arrested must be brought before a magistrate as soon as practicable and, in any event, within 24 hours (excluding Sundays (s. 7(7)). In *Governor of Glen Parva Young Offender Institution, ex parte G* \[1998\] QB 877, D was arrested for breach of bail conditions. He was taken to the cells of a magistrates\' court within 24 hours of arrest but was not brought before a magistrate until two hours after the expiry of the 24-hour time-limit. The Divisional Court held that the detention after 24 hours was unlawful, as s. 7(4) requires the defendant to be brought before a justice of the peace (not merely brought within the court precincts or to the court cells) within 24 hours of arrest. [Arrest following grant of conditional bail by the crown court] D7.103 comchabais D7.104 D7.105 D7.108 D7.110 D7.111 D7.113