HC Deb 21 October 1982 vol 29 cc576-8

APPLICATIONS TO CROWN COURT FOR BAIL BY PERSONS REMANDED IN CUSTODY

Lords amendment: No. 156, after clause 47 insert: Q.—(1) In section 81 of the Supreme Court Act 1981 (a) in subsection (1) (which lists cases in which the Crown Court may grant bail) at the end of paragraph (f) there shall be added "or (g) who has been remanded in custody by a magistrates' court on adjourning a case under—

  1. (i)section 5 (adjournment of inquiry into offence);
  2. (ii)section 10 (adjournment of trial);
  3. (iii)section 18 (initial procedure on information against adult for offence triable either way); or
  4. (iv)section 30 (remand for medical examination), of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980;";

(b) the following subsections shall be inserted after that subsection —

"(1H) Where the Crown Court grants a person bail under subsection (1)(g) it may direct him to appear at a time and place which the magistrates' court could have directed and the recognizance of any surety shall be conditioned accordingly. (1J) The Crown Court may only grant bail to a person under subsection (1)(g) if the magistrates' court which remanded him in custody has certified under section 5(6A) of the Bail Act 1976 that it heard full argument on his application for bail before it refused the application.".

(2) In subsection (6)(a) of section 5 of the Bail Act 1976 (supplementary provisions about decisions on bail) after the word "Court", in the first place where it occurs, there shall be inserted the words "or if it issues a certificate under subsection (6A) below".

(3) The following subsections shall be inserted after that subsection—

"(6A) Where in criminal proceedings— (a) a magistrates' court remands a person in custody under any of the following provisions of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980

  1. (i)section 5 (adjournment of inquiry into offence);
  2. (ii)section 10 (adjournment of trial);
  3. (iii)section 18 (initial procedure on information against adult for offence triable either way); or
  4. (iv)section 30 (remand for medical examination),

after hearing full argument on an application for bail from him; and (b) either—

  1. (i)it has not previously heard such argument on an application for bail from him in those proceedings; or
  2. (ii)it has previously heard full argument from him on such an application but it is satisfied that there has been a change in his circumstances or that new considerations have been placed before it,

it shall be the duty of the court to issue a certificate in the prescribed form that they heard full argument on his application for bail before they refused the application. (6B) Where the court issues a certificate under subsection (6A) above in a case to which paragraph (b)(ii) of that subsection applies, it shall state in the certificate the nature of the change of circumstances or the new considerations which caused it to hear a further fully argued bail application. >(6C)Where a court issues a certificate under subsection (6A) above it shall cause the person to whom it refuses bail to be given a copy of the certificate.".

(4) In section 30 of the Legal Aid Act 1974 (scope of legal aid) the following subsections shall be inserted after subsection (1)—

"(1A) Legal aid which may be ordered to be given to any person for the purposes of any proceedings by a legal aid order under section 28(2) above, whether or not in the circumstances mentioned in section 29(1)(c) above, shall include, in the event —

  1. (a)of his being remanded in custody in those proceedings; and
  2. (b)of the court issuing a certificate under section 5(6A) of the Bail Act 1976 (refusal of fully argued bail application),

legal aid for the purpose of proceedings in connection with an application for bail to the Crown Court. (1B) Notwithstanding anything in subsection (1) above, legal aid in connection with an application for bail to the Crown Court shall not include representation by counsel except in a case where by virtue of subsection (2) (a) below legal aid ordered to be given for the purposes of the proceedings before the magistrates' court included representation by counsel."."
Mr. Mayhew

I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said amendment.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

With this it will be convenient to consider Lords amendment No. 253.

Mr. Mayhew

This new clause fulfils an undertaking that the Government gave at the time of the Bill's passage through this House. It provides that defendants who are refused bail by a magistrates' court after the hearing of a full application will have a further avenue of application to the Crown court. It also provides that legal aid will be available for the purposes of such applications. Legal aid will be provided by an automatic extension to existing legal aid orders so that there will be no need for the defendant to make a separate application for it.

Where the magistrates' court refuses bail to the defendant after hearing a full application for bail, it will be required to issue a certificate to that effect and the Crown court's power to grant bail will be limited to cases where such a certificate has been issued. The House will note that I have emphasised that the avenue of application will be available only after a full hearing. The effect of the case of the Queen against Nottingham justices was that a magistrates court decision on one full application for bail should bind the court, which would not have to hear further applications unless it could be shown that there had been a change in the circumstances of the defendant since the date of the first application. It is not intended that a court's decision that there has been no change in circumstances should be capable of appeal to the Crown court. The essential purpose of the new clause, therefore, is to allow the defendant to secure a review of the magistrates' court's substantive decision that, given the full range of circumstances existing at the time of his application, bail should be refused. The Government are satisfied that the new clause will assist defendants to pursue their applications for bail at a rather more convenient forum than the High Court at present represents.

Mr. Kilroy-Sillk

For many years, the system of judicial review of magistrates courts' decisions to refuse bail has been allowed to remain in a highly unsatisfactory state given the face that about 44 per cent. of the 58,00() individuals who ate remanded in custody every year are eventually found not guilty or given a non-custodial sentence. Many people are inappropriately remanded in custody and refused bail. The provision for a legally-aided right of application to the Crown court will have several advantages over the present procedure for applying to a High Court judge in chambers. It is obviously far more accessible and speedier. Because of the advantages of legal representation, the defendant will presumably have his case presented by a lawyer who will be aware of the most effective form of presenting his case and is therefore more likely to obtain bail for the defendant.

This amendment introduces an important change, for which reformers have been pressing for some years. The Minister has fulfilled a commitment that he gave to me on Report when I tabled a similar amendment on behalf of the parliament all-party penal affairs group. I welcome the amendment.

Question put and agreed to.

Forward to