Australia, June 30 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement on May 30:
1. HAMILL J: Salim Mehajer ("Mr Mehajer" or "the applicant") makes a release application pursuant to the provisions of the Bail Act 2013 (NSW). The Director of Public Prosecutions ("the Director" or "the respondent") opposes the application.
2. Subject to the provision in s 74 of the Bail Act, the Court has the power to hear the application because there is an appeal and/or an application for leave to appeal pending in the Court: Bail Act, s 61. Mr Mehajer was sentenced on 9 May 2024 following his convictions in two separate trials. The first trial related to offences of violence, including domestic violence offences relating to his former partner ("the domestic violence offences"), while the second trial concerned offences of making false documents ("the fraud offences"). The domestic violence offences were allegedly committed between 2018 and 2020, while the fraud offences are said to have been committed in March 2020. The verdicts in the two trials were returned respectively on 10 May 2023 and 30 June 2023. However, Mr Mehajer has been in more or less continuous custody since 20 January 2021 when he was first refused bail in relation to the domestic violence offences. That period of custody relates not only to the convictions currently under appeal, but also to unrelated matters. A more detailed chronology set out at [11] shows that there was a brief period between 10 January 2023 and 31 January 2023 when the applicant had bail.
3. Putting aside any assessment of risk pursuant to ss 17-19 of the Bail Act, the application faces two substantial obstacles. First, as foreshadowed in the previous paragraph, it is caught by s 74 of the Bail Act which prohibits multiple release applications to the same Court unless there are grounds for such an application. Secondly, assuming there are grounds upon which the Court decides to entertain the application, the Court is "not to grant bail" unless "special or exceptional circumstances exist that justify" that decision: Bail Act, s 22. The latter provision applies because Mr Mehajer's proposed appeal is against his conviction and sentence on indictment. Its operation has been considered in several decision of this Court: see, for example, El-Hilli & Melville v R [2015] NSWCCA 146, HT v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2019] NSWCCA 141, Fantakis v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2021] NSWCCA 271 and more than one application involving the applicant himself.
4. The case has a substantial history, which I will set out in more detail below. On 28 August 2024, this Court (Fagan, N Adams and Faulkner JJ) refused a release application: Mehajer v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) [2024] NSWCCA 172. Then, on 6 December 2024, the Court (Kirk JA, Rothman and Yehia JJ) refused another release application: Mehajer v R [2024] NSWCCA 226. Two weeks later, on 20 December 2024, the Court (similarly constituted) refused leave to re-open the bail proceedings: Mehajer v R (No 2) [2024] NSWCCA 247. In the first of those December decisions, Yehia J provided clear and detailed reasons for judgment with which Kirk JA and Rothman J agreed. Her Honour set out the history and facts of the case, the issues at the trial and some of the matters to be ventilated on the appeal. Her Honour also dealt with the submissions and relevant considerations governing the outcome of the release application. These reasons assume some familiarity with the judgment of Yehia J and also that delivered by the Court in August 2024.
5. The present release application was lodged with the Court registry on (or around) 5 February 2025. Following an exchange of evidence and filing of written submissions, the application was heard on 26 March 2025. Because the applicant filed important documents in the days before the hearing, the Director was granted seven days to file further written submissions. These "supplementary submissions" were filed on 31 March 2025. Mr Mehajer responded on 7 April 2025 by filing more evidence, as well as submissions in reply to the respondent's supplementary submissions.
*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/1971477c7d973795d8c5b029)
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
