A judge accused the Crown of ambush in the Invercargill District Court yesterday when it failed to file an opposition ahead of a man’s bail hearing.
Crown lawyer Mike Brownlie got up and said he was going to deliver a short oral opposition to bail.
However, Judge Couch said it was unjust "to ambush a defence" in giving the Crown’s opposition orally without allowing time for a defendant’s lawyer to prepare counter-submissions.
Mr Brownlie told Judge Couch it was common practice for the Crown to give oral submissions in the Invercargill Court during a bail hearing.
The judge rejected this and said it was not common practice in any other court in New Zealand.
"If this is the practice here, it is not an acceptable practice.
"There are some systems which have fallen down seriously here."
After declining Mulligan’s bail, the judge also put on record what he described as very disconcerting features of how the bail hearing was conducted.
Despite a formal written application being sent to the court by the defence, the Crown had failed to provide a summary of facts to Mulligan’s lawyer until the day prior to the court hearing and had not filed one to the court, Judge Couch said.
It was only after Judge Couch asked Mr Brownlie whether section 12 of the Bail Act applied to Mulligan, that Mr Brownlie researched it to see if it did.
"Had I not asked, I strongly suspect I may not ever have been made aware of the case."
Mulligan and his counsel were taken by surprise during the hearing when Mr Brownlie delivered the Crown’s opposition to bail, Judge Couch said.
"Ms [Tanya] McCullum fairly told me the grounds of opposition were what she suspected they might be."
Judge Couch said he trusted this would not happen again.
