Key Facts
- •Jake Hammond was granted bail on December 23, 2023, by Southampton Magistrates' Court after pleading not guilty to charges of strangulation, assault, and criminal damage.
- •The prosecution appealed the bail grant under s 1(1) of the Bail Amendment Act 1993, giving oral notice at 13:56 and serving written notice shortly thereafter.
- •The appeal was not commenced within 48 hours (excluding weekends and holidays) as required by s 1(8) of the Act.
- •Hammond's continued detention at HMP Winchester was challenged via a writ of habeas corpus.
- •The court considered several previous cases interpreting the Bail Amendment Act 1993.
Legal Principles
Section 1(8) of the Bail Amendment Act 1993 mandates that an appeal against the granting of bail must be commenced within 48 hours (excluding weekends and public holidays).
Bail (Amendment) Act 1993, s 1(8)
While strict compliance isn't always fatal, the court's duty is to construe the provision in line with practical realities, but with a narrow scope for flexibility due to liberty rights.
Isleworth Crown Court, ex parte Clarke [1998] 1 Cr App R 257; Middlesex Guildhall Crown Court, ex p. Okoli [2000] 1 Cr. App. R. 1; R. (on the application of Jeffrey) v Warwick Crown Court [2003] Crim LR 190; R. (Cardin) v Birmingham Crown Court and Birmingham Magistrates’ Court [2017] EWHC 2101 (Admin)
In habeas corpus cases, the burden rests on the detaining authority to demonstrate lawful authority for detention.
Walid Niagui v The Governor of HMP Wandsworth [2022] EWHC 291
Factors to consider when assessing non-compliance with the Act include the prosecution's due diligence, whether the delay was their fault, whether it was due to circumstances outside their control, and whether there was prejudice to the defendant.
Re Glenn Rainey [2019] NIQB 65
Outcomes
Hammond was ordered to be released, subject to the bail conditions imposed by the magistrates.
The prosecution failed to commence the appeal within the 48-hour timeframe mandated by s 1(8) of the Bail Amendment Act 1993, and failed to demonstrate sufficient justification for the delay.