[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	Jersey Unreported Judgments
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Unreported Judgments >> 1999/65 - AG v Louvel [1999] UR 65 (9 April 1999) URL: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/1999/65.html Cite as: [1999] UR 65

[New search] [Contents list] [Help]

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

9 April 1999

Before: Sir Philip Bailhache, Kt., Bailiff, and

Jurats Le Ruez and Tibbo

AG

-v-

Darren Gerald Louvel

Application for a review of refusal of bail in the Magistrates Court

On 5 March, 1999: the Applicant pleaded guilty to:

2 counts of driving whilst disqualified, contrary to Article 9(4) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law, 1956; and

2 counts of driving whilst uninsured, contrary to Article 2(1) of the Motor Traffic (Third Party Insurance) (Jersey) Law, 1948, and was remanded in custody without a bail option.

On 9, 10 & 29 March, 1999: further bail applications were refused.

On 29 March, 1999: the Applicant pleaded guilty to the following further charges:

2 counts of driving whilst disqualified, contrary to Article 9(4) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law, 1956; and

2 counts of driving whilst uninsured, contrary to Article 2(1) of the Motor Traffic (Third Party Insurance ) (Jersey) Law, 1948.

Bail was refused.

The Applicant is in breach of a 2 year binding over order, made by the Royal Court on 14 August, 1998, following a guilty plea to 3 counts of assault, 4 counts of breach of the peace, 2 counts of malicious damage and 1 count of dangerous driving. [1998.173]

Application refused, but if Applicant not indicted within the month, he shall be at liberty to renew the bail application.

D E Le Cornu, Esq., Crown Advocate

Advocate N J Chapman for the Applicant

JUDGMENT

THE BAILIFF: When an applicant is refused bail by the Magistrate and applies to this Court for a review of the Magistrates Order, the Court has to ask itself a number of questions: has the Magistrate misdirected himself in the Law, or otherwise applied the wrong test; or has the Magistrate acted unreasonably in all the circumstances in refusing to grant bail?

This applicant was sentenced by this Court on 14 August, 1998, to two years probation in circumstances in which the Crown Advocate had moved for a prison term of some length. The applicant, since being placed on probation by the Court, has now admitted that on three separate occasions he breached the Order of the Court and drove whilst disqualified.

In these circumstances the Magistrate was, in our judgment, absolutely entitled to reach the conclusion that the applicant should remain in custody pending sentence by this Court for the offences to which he has pleaded guilty and the further offences for which he was sentenced in August of last year.

We accept the submission by counsel that we should take care that the applicant should not remain in custody for a period which might exceed any sentence imposed by this Court and to that end we express the hope that the Attorney General will be able to indict the applicant within one month of his being committed by the Magistrates Court. If for any reason such indictment is not laid before that time it will be open to the applicant to come back to this Court and to renew his application. In the meantime the application is refused.

No Authorities