Janis Ernstreits v Municipal State Attorney Office Osijek Croatia

For a person sought for trial rather than conviction, the presumption in favour of bail applies. It is displaced where the proposed conditions do not reduce to an acceptable level the risk that the person will fail to surrender.

A history of repeated breaches, leaving a required residence and failing to comply after modified conditions may demonstrate that the risk cannot be controlled by further reporting or residence requirements. Vulnerability, medical conditions and dependency are relevant, but do not require bail where the surrender risk remains unacceptable.

The applicant, a Latvian national, was sought by Croatia to stand trial for alleged fraud. He applied for bail under section 22 of the Criminal Justice Act 1967 pending an extradition hearing.

He had previously been granted bail subject to stringent conditions, but repeatedly breached residence, curfew, signing-on and reporting requirements. Following further breaches, medical evidence established significant vulnerability, epilepsy, alcohol dependence, a brain injury and a chaotic lifestyle. The central issue was whether proposed bail conditions could reduce the risk of failure to surrender to an acceptable level.

1. The application for bail was refused. Because the applicant was sought for trial rather than conviction, the statutory presumption in favour of bail under section 22 of the Criminal Justice Act 1967 applied.

2. The presumption was firmly displaced on the facts. The controlling question was whether the proposed conditions reduced to an acceptable level the risk that the applicant would fail to surrender.

3. The applicant’s repeated breaches showed a lack of discipline in complying with reporting conditions. His previous departure from the address at which he was required to reside demonstrated that he was capable of going to ground. Earlier relaxation or modification of the conditions had not improved compliance.

4. The court accepted that the applicant was vulnerable and that his complex medical conditions contributed to his chaotic lifestyle. Those matters did not overcome the unacceptable surrender risk. A proposal requiring earlier reporting, before the effects of alcohol arose, was not sufficient.

5. The court also took account of the difficulties the applicant might face in prison because of his medical conditions and dependencies. Those conditions were not unusual in prison establishments, whose medical staff could provide the required treatment.