An application for bail can be made as soon as the accused person appears following an arrest, but timing and preparation is critical.

An accused who has been refused bail and is in custody pending the hearing of the charge may make further applications, however a court must not hear a further application unless:

This hurdle does not apply to fresh applications under inherent jurisdiction (regarding the inherent jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, see: "Appeal and variation of bail orders", below).

It is advisable to consider the following matters prior to the hearing of the application for bail.

If the police maintain their opposition to bail, it is necessary to explore the reasons for this. Sometimes opposition can be overcome with "negotiated" conditions, for example offering that the accused report daily, obtain drug rehabilitation and/or treatment, adhere to a curfew or provide a substantial surety (see: "Sureties", below). These matters should be discussed with the prosecution prior to the commencement of the hearing.

A further consideration recently introduced into the Bail Act is the Aboriginality of the applicant. In making a determination under the Bail Act a court must take into account any issues that arise due to the persons Aboriginality, including cultural background and other relevant cultural issues or obligations - (s.3A). An Aboriginal person is defined as a person descended from an Aborigine or Torres Strait Islander and who identifies as an Aborigine or Torres Strait Islander and is accepted as an Aborigine or Torres Strait Islander by an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Island community.

Bail applications are won or lost on the facts that arise in the bail hearing. As bail is essentially about ensuring that a person turns up to meet charges levelled against them, the facts must address that issue. The more serious the charge, the stronger the case and the higher the likely penalty, the higher the risk of the person not turning up to court to answer the charges. The less serious the charge, the weaker the evidence, the lower the penalty and the stronger the ties to the jurisdiction, the more likely it is that the person will come to court to answer the charge. Relevant to this is whether, if convicted, an accused is unlikely to be imprisoned, or if imprisoned the term is likely to be less than the period they would otherwise spend in custody if bail is denied.

Bail is not about the total elimination of the risk of failing to appear (that could only be met by every accused person being detained in custody pending trial), but about reducing that risk to an acceptable level.

The Evidence Act 2008 (Vic) applies to the conduct of bail hearings (s.4(1)(a)); however, this does not affect provisions in the Bail Act which give the court power to make wide-ranging inquiries about the accused or receive any evidence which it considers credible and trustworthy (s.8(a)-(e)). Accordingly, in a bail application the strict rules of evidence do not apply. The informant may give evidence about the circumstances of the alleged offence by the accused, including the strength of the case. Additionally the prosecution can lead evidence of the accused's prior criminal history and of reasons why they are an unacceptable risk. An accused can also give evidence in support of an application but shall not be questioned about the offence (s.8(b)).

The court can also make an order forbidding the publication of any information relating to a bail application (s.7).

The court admitting an accused person to bail has a duty to give to the accused and any sureties a notice setting out the conditions of the bail. In addition it has a duty to ensure that they understand the conditions and the consequences of not complying with them (s.17).

Where a person is committed for trial before a Judge and jury for a serious offence, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) shall advise the accused and any sureties of the time and place for the trial. The accused must keep the DPP informed of any changes of address (s.29).