Court bail and remand

June 2025

There are small but significant differences when it comes to applying for bail on behalf of a child. It is critical to know these differences to properly represent a child at a bail hearing.

Useful guidance and decision-making criteria on bail and remands can be found in the Youth Court Bench Book.  Helpful flowcharts from the Book are included in this guide in Appendices 1 and 2. The Ministry of Justice’s (MOJ’s) Youth Re­mand Concordat  also contains useful reminders of the responsibilities of everyone involved in the bail and remand process.

Detention considerations for children are set out in sections 98–102 of the Legal Aid, Sen­tencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO). These provisions were amended on 28 June 2022 with the aim of ensuring that custodial remand is always used as a last resort. 

The court must first consider whether to grant bail, with or without conditions. The possible objections to bail are broadly similar to adults, with some important distinctions (see below), but the subsequent remand considerations are different from those for adults.

Presumption of bail 

For child defendants, there is a presumption of bail  – except where the child is charged with or convicted of murder, attempted murder, man­slaughter, certain serious sex offences, or if the child defendant has certain specified previous convictions.  In such cases, the court can still grant bail, but only if there are exceptional circum­stances that justify it. 

Objections to bail for imprisonable and indictable offences 

As with adult defendants, the court can only remand the child if there are substantial grounds to believe that one of the statutory objections to bail exist in relation to the child defendant. General objections to bail: 

• failure to surrender to custody
• committing an offence on bail
• interference with witnesses or otherwise obstructing the course of justice
• for their own protection. 

There is an additional reason specific to children on which basis bail can be refused: 

• for the child’s own welfare – this criterion has been found not to breach a child’s rights when refused bail at the police station for their own protection.  

Bail in relation to children may also be withheld on the following bases:  

• the child is already in custody serving a sen­tence
• there is insufficient information to make a bail decision
• the child has been on bail in these proceed­ings and is arrested for breach of bail condi­tions
• it is impracticable to complete enquiries or make a report unless the child is in custody
• the child was on bail for another matter on the date of the offence. 

Objections to bail for summary only, imprisonable offences 

The definition of imprisonable offences is defined by whether or not it is imprisonable for an adult.  The possible objections to bail are narrower and the court can withhold bail for these offences only if: 

• the child has previously failed to surrender to custody and, in view of that failure, the court believes that they would fail to surrender
• the child was on bail for another matter at the time of the instant offence, and there are substantial grounds to believe that they would commit further offences on bail
• there are substantial grounds to believe that the child would cause mental or physical injury or fear of mental or physical injury to an asso­ciated person. 

Or further: 

• if it is for the child defendant’s own protection or welfare
• the child is already in custody serving a sen­tence
• there is insufficient information to make a bail decision
• the child is arrested for breach of bail in these proceedings and substantial grounds exist for believing they would fail to surrender, commit further offences, interfere with witnesses or obstruct justice. 

Or further: 

• if it is for the defendant’s own protection (or welfare, if a child).
• the child is already in custody serving a sen­tence
• there is insufficient information to make a bail decision
• the child is arrested for breach of bail in these proceedings and substantial grounds exist for believing they would fail to surrender, commit further offences, interfere with witnesses or obstruct justice.

Objections to bail for non-imprisonable offences 

The statutory grounds for withholding bail for children charged with non-imprisonable offences are not substantially different to those for adults. For children, a court need not grant bail in such cases if:  

• the child has previously failed to surrender and, in view of that failure, the court believes that the child will fail to surrender
• it is for the child’s own protection or welfare
• the child is in custody serving a sentence
• the child has been arrested for breach of bail in these proceedings and there are substantial grounds to believe that the child would fail to surrender, commit further offences, or inter­fere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct the course of justice. 

The court’s approach to bail 

The court must first decide whether to grant bail. 

• The first consideration should be uncondition­al bail.
• The court must consider whether any of the statutory objections to bail can be met by con­ditions. The court can only impose bail condi­tions in order to allay those fears, or to ensure the child assists with the writing of reports or attends a meeting with their lawyer (s3(6) Bail Act 1976). Appropriate conditions can be de­vised by the Youth Justice Service (YJS), who can also offer bail support and supervision to help allay any bail concerns. The YJS will need to assess the child and their circumstances to present a suitable package to the court.
• Where the court does not consider standard bail support and supervision to be sufficient, the court will consider conditional bail with intensive support and supervision (ISS) as an alternative to secure remand. 

Conditional bail 

The court may impose conditions on a child defendant’s bail for the child’s own protection or, additionally, for a child’s welfare or in their own interests. 

Curfews

Curfews do not need to have electronic monitoring. Doorstep curfews do still exist, but for a child to receive credit for time spent on curfew, the curfew must be a ‘qualifying curfew’. This means it must be for nine hours or more and must be electronically monitored. Each day the child spends on such a curfew means that a half-day must be deducted from any subsequent custodial sentence. The total will be rounded up if necessary. 
 

Electronic monitoring

Curfews with electronic monitoring can only be imposed on children where the following condi­tions, as specified under section 3AA of the Bail Act 1976, are satisfied: 

(a) they have attained the age of 12 years; 

(b) they: 

i. are charged with or have been convicted of a violent, sexual or terrorism offence punishable in the case of an adult with imprisonment for a term of fourteen years or more; or 

ii. are charged with/convicted of one or more imprisonable offences which, to­gether with any convictions for impris­onable offences, amount to (or would if convicted) to a recent history of repeat­edly committing imprisonable offences while remanded on bail or to custodial remand; 

(c) electronic monitoring must be available in the area, and

(d) the YJS must inform the court that the impo­sition of the requirement would be suitable. 

Location monitoring 

Conditional bail with location monitoring may be imposed on a child where the conditions, as spec­ified under section 3AA of the Bail Act 1976, are satisfied (see ‘Electronic monitoring’ above).

Conditional bail with intensive support and supervision

ISS  is an intensive community-based package, offered where standard bail support and super­vision are not considered sufficient, and is an alternative to secure remand. The YJS will assess whether a child is suitable for ISS bail, but the decision rests with the court. Conditions are likely to include tagged curfews and voice verification. 

ISS programmes can, in some cases, be un­der-utilised by local authorities due to resourcing and financial pressures. Early discussions should be had with the YJS to determine whether ISS bail is appropriate where there is a high risk of remand due to the nature of the offence. However, it is very important to ensure that ISS bail is proposed and used only as a last resort, given how intensive and restrictive it is. The YJS can and should look to propose more bespoke, tailored and child-fo­cused bail support and supervision alternatives that can allow the court to grant conditional bail. It is often about both the YJS and defence advocat­ing to the court the rationale as to why conditional bail would be more suitable than ISS and would still be ‘robust’.

Remand to local authority accommodation 

If bail for a child is refused, the court must remand to local authority accommodation (RLAA), unless the ‘strict criteria’  to remand to youth detention accommodation (RYDA) are met  (see below). The court must consult with the local authority, through the YJS, before imposing conditions on the remand.  If RLAA conditions are breached, the child can be arrested and brought back to court in the same manner as breach of bail. 

The designated local authority responsible for a child who is to be on RLAA must be stated in open court.  Local authorities must accommodate any children placed on RLAA. 

RLAA can include the child living at home with their parents or guardian (even though bail has been refused) if the local authority assesses this to be the best accommodation option. However, the court can stipulate that the child must not reside with a named person. 

The court may impose conditions in the same way as bail conditions.  This can include a curfew with electronic monitoring,  but there is no power to impose electronic monitoring for GPS tagging (location monitoring). The court must consult with the designated local authority before imposing any conditions.  The court may impose requirements on the local authority for securing the child’s com­pliance with any conditions.  

The local authority may apply to the court for conditions to be imposed.  The designated local authority, or the child, may also apply for any RLAA conditions (or requirements) to be varied or revoked.  

The court must explain to the child in ordi­nary language why it is imposing (or varying) the conditions. 

Remand to youth detention accommodation 

RYDA  is only lawful when bail has been re­fused and when certain conditions are met. The two ways a child can be detained are set out in sections 98 and 99 of LASPO.  The court does not specify where the child will be detained; the ultimate decision is made by the Youth Custody Service, following a recommendation by the YJS.  The court must designate which local authority is responsible for the child, which includes respon­sibility for accommodation costs and travel costs. At this point, the child becomes ‘looked after’. This imposes additional duties and safeguards on the local authority for that child  (see below for more detail). 

Sections 98 and 99 of LASPO (as amended on 28 June 2022) state: 

98 First set of conditions for a remand to youth detention accommodation 

... 

(2) The age condition is that the child has reached the age of twelve. 

(2A) The sentencing condition is that it ap­pears to the court very likely that the child will be sentenced to a custodial sentence for the offence mentioned in section 91(1) or one or more of those offences. 

(3) The offence condition is that the of­fence mentioned in section 91(1), or 

one or more of those offences– 

(a) is a violent, sexual or ter­rorism offence, or 

(b) is an offence punishable in the case of an adult with imprisonment for a term of 14 years or more. 

(4) The necessity condition is that the court is of the opinion, after considering all the options for the remand of the child, that only remanding the child to youth detention accommodation would be adequate– 

(a) to protect the public from death or se­rious personal injury (whether physical or psychological) occasioned by further offences committed by the child, or 

(b) to prevent the commission by the child of imprisonable offences and that the risks posed by the child cannot be managed safely in the community. 

[See below: Appendix 1 Flowchart for the route to youth detention accommodation under section 98 of LASPO – necessity criteria.] 

99 Second set of conditions for a remand to youth detention accommodation 

… 

(2) The age condition is that the child has reached the age of twelve. 

(3) The sentencing condition is that it is very likely that the child will be sentenced to a cus­todial sentence for the offence mentioned in section 91(1) or one or more of those offences. 

(4) The offence condition is that the offence mentioned in section 91(1), or one or more of those offences, is an imprisonable offence. 

(5) The first history condition is that– 

(a) the child has a recent and significant history of absconding while subject to a custodial remand, and it appears to the court that the history is relevant in all the circumstances of the case, and 

(b) the offence mentioned in section 91(1), or one or more of those offences, is alleged to be or has been found to have been committed while the child was remand­ed to local authority accommodation or youth detention accommodation. 

(6) The second history condition is that the offence or offences mentioned in section 91(1), together with any other imprisonable offences of which the child has been con­victed in any proceedings, amount or would, if the child were convicted of that offence or those offences, amount to a recent and significant history of committing imprisonable offences while on bail or subject to a cus­todial remand, and this appears to the court relevant in all the circumstances of the case. 

(7) The necessity condition is that the court is of the opinion, after considering all the options for the remand of the child, that only remanding the child to youth detention accommodation would be adequate– 

(a) to protect the public from death or se­rious personal injury (whether physical or psychological) occasioned by further offences committed by the child, or 

(b) to prevent the commission by the child of imprisonable offences and the risks posed by the child cannot be managed safely in the community. 

[See Appendix 2 below: Flowchart for the route to youth detention accommodation under section 99 of LASPO – history criteria.] 

When considering the sentencing condition and whether it is very likely that the child will be sentenced to custody, the Youth Court Bench Book states that the court ‘must consult the Overarching principles – sentencing children and young people’.  The Bench Book further states: ‘The court must be very mindful that the minimum custodial sentence in the youth court is a DTO [Detention and Training Order] of four months. If there is not a very likely risk of such a sentence, then a RYDA under this section is not permitted.’ 

Before deciding whether to RYDA, the court must consider the interests and welfare of the child.  This is a substantial obligation that should be go beyond mere words or superficial agree­ment and demonstrate genuine commitment or action. The criteria of what is involved in con­sidering welfare includes: meeting the needs of children; protecting them from maltreatment; preventing impairment of their mental and physical health; ensuring that children grow up in cir­cumstances consistent with safe and effective care; and promoting the upbringing of children with their birth parents or wider family whenever possible.  These are very relevant to the court’s decision-making on bail and remand. Further detail on safeguarding and welfare can be found in our guide, ‘Safeguarding first’. 

Where the court decides to RYDA, it must state in open court its reasons  and (a) that it has considered the interests and welfare of the child and (b) explain why it is of the opinion that the necessity condition is met. This is designed to reinforce the existing presumption of non-custo­dial remand by ensuring courts consider RLAA as a first step. 

If the conditions of sections 98 or 99 of LASPO are not met, the court cannot remand the child to youth detention accommodation.

Calculating time spent on remand

Where a child is sentenced to a DTO, any time spent on remand (section 240ZA of the Criminal Justice Act 2003) or time spent on a qualifying curfew (section 240A of Criminal Justice Act 2003) will count towards their DTO in the same manner as adults. It only applies to custodial remands and therefore will not allow for credit to be given for those remanded to local authority accommodation. In such cases, it will be a matter for the judge to take that into account when passing sentence. 

Where a child has been refused bail and has been remanded into youth detention accommodation, they may make a second bail application advanc­ing any argument, including previous arguments. 

The court has a duty at every hearing to consider whether a child ought to be granted bail. A second bail application following a refusal can put forward the same arguments as before.  Any further applications should be based on new considerations not previously put before the court – but note that the ‘passage of time itself may be considered to be a change of circumstance in par­ticular cases’.  The duty of the court to have re­gard to the child’s welfare may also be a reason to allow repeat bail applications.  Therefore, it may be appropriate for the court to hear a further bail application for a child, even if the defence cannot show that there are new facts or arguments for the court to consider.

Application to the Crown Court 

If a child is denied bail by the youth court or adult magistrates’ court, or wishes to apply to vary the conditions, the child can apply to the Crown Court to reconsider an application for bail.  An appli­cation to the Crown Court must be made as soon as practicable and served on the Crown Court, the youth court or adult magistrates’ court; the prosecutor; and any surety.  It must include the copy of the certificate of full argument made in the lower court. 

Appeal by the prosecution to the Crown Court 

The prosecutor may appeal to the Crown Court against the grant of bail if the child is charged with an offence punishable by imprisonment.  The prosecutor must inform the court and the child’s representative of the intention to appeal at the end of the hearing and before the child is released from court,  and then serve a notice to appeal on both the court and the child’s representative within two hours of having informed them of the intention to appeal.  Failure to serve the notice in time will result in the child being released from custody.  If notice is served, the child will have to remain in custody until the appeal is heard,  which should be as soon as practicable and no later than the second business day. 

If a child is charged with murder, but not attempt­ed murder, they must be remanded at the youth court or magistrates’ court to appear before the Crown Court.  However, the court must still con­sider whether to RYDA or RLAA using the criteria in LASPO as set out above.  A Crown Court judge can grant bail, RLAA or RYDA, and the same crite­ria set out above must be considered. The Crown Court judge must consider bail by the second business day after the first hearing in the youth or magistrates’ court (section 14.10 of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2020). There is no right to bail. The Crown Court judge may only grant bail if the court is satisfied that there is no significant risk that, if released on bail, the child would commit an offence that would be likely to cause physical or mental injury to another person. 

Breach of bail 

Breach of bail is not a separate criminal offence, but the police can arrest a child if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the child has breached the conditions of their bail, will breach the conditions of their bail or fail to surrender to court. If a child is arrested for breach of bail, the child must be brought before the court as soon as is practicable within 24 hours of the arrest.  (If the child is charged with murder, they must be brought before a Crown Court judge). 

The court must determine whether the breach took place. The court must release the child on the same bail conditions as before unless it is of the opinion either that the child: 

• is likely to fail to surrender to custody; or
• has breached or is likely to breach any condi­tion of bail. 

If the court finds that the child did breach, or was likely to breach, their bail conditions or likely to fail to surrender, then the court can reconsider bail (the considerations are as set out above). The child can be released on the same conditions or different conditions, or if an objection is made, remanded to LAA or YDA where those criteria are met.

When a child breaches conditions related to their support package with the YJS, it is a matter for the YJS whether to bring the matter back be­fore the court. 

Breach of remand to local authority accommodation 

A child can be arrested if the police have reasona­ble grounds for suspecting that the child has bro­ken any of the conditions in respect of a RLAA.  As with bail breaches, the child must be brought before the court within 24 hours of the arrest.  If the court finds that the child has breached one of the conditions of the RLAA, the court can revisit the decision and the conditions.   

Failure to surrender to custody 

When a person is granted bail, they are under a duty to surrender to custody.  It is an additional criminal offence not to go to court at the time and place given without reasonable excuse. If a child does not appear, without a reasonable excuse, the court can issue a warrant. That warrant can be backed for bail or not backed for bail. 

If the warrant is not backed for bail, the child will be arrested by the police and brought before the court. If there is no court sitting at the time of arrest – for example, if the child is arrested in the evening – the child will be held overnight in police cells to be brought to court the next morning.

The role of the YJS 

The YJS has a statutory duty to provide support for children on bail or remand.  Information from the YJS is a statutory requirement before certain decisions concerning bail and remand are made – for example, curfew. It is therefore crucial for a practitioner representing a child defendant to contact the YJS immediately. 

The YJS must prepare either a bail supervi­sion and support package, or an ISS bail package, to identify how a child can be managed in the community as an alternative to remand into cus­tody.  Practitioners should be ready to suggest certain conditions – for example, residence at a proposed address; curfew; no contact provisions; and geographic exclusions.

The YJS also has a number of responsibil­ities once a decision has been made as to bail and remand. They are required to work with the child and their family to understand and follow any conditions of the bail,  case manage bail ISS provisions  and support children who are on RLAA, including putting a plan in place if the child turns 18.  For children on RYDA, they must spend time with the child following their remand decision to support their wellbeing and discuss next steps, visit the child in custody, put together a remand plan and plan for the child’s resettlement when they are released. 

If the YJS does not support bail 

It is a matter for the court whether to grant bail, and the court may grant bail even where the YJS do not support it. 

The YJS will carry out a risk assessment that determines whether they support bail for the child. Their central concerns will be around potential reoffending, harm to the public and safeguarding the child. 

If the YJS take the position that they cannot support bail, it is important to find out why and to do everything possible to address their concerns or to find alternative arrangements or conditions that might suffice. 

This can sometimes be done by offering an address out of the area. In some cases, the con­cern stems from the seriousness of the offence. This can sometimes be addressed by pointing out that a co-accused charged with the same offence has been given bail, or by highlighting weaknesses in the Crown’s case. 

However, if the YJS maintain the position that they cannot support bail, it is vital to ask that their report clarifies their reasons, for example, that this is solely due to the seriousness and is not a reflec­tion of concerns about the child’s engagement or compliance.

Child First 

As stated above, the YJB and the CPS have com­mitted to a Child First approach, which pledges to see children as children first and foremost, prioritising the best interests of children and rec­ognising their particular needs, capacities, rights and potential.  This underlies the actions of these agencies concerning children and is very relevant to the decision of bail and remand.

The role of children’s social care 

The Youth Remand Concordat states that chil­dren’s social care must attend bail and remand hearings in respect of looked after children.  Chil­dren’s social care may also need to be involved at initial bail and remand hearings. They should also assist with information on the child’s background, circumstances and welfare to support bail support packages.  

There may also be cases where it is impossi­ble or inappropriate for the bail address to be that of a family member. This should not increase the child’s chances of RYDA. The local authority is required to provide accommodation to any child in need (under 18) if they have no one to look after them, they have been lost or abandoned or where the person who has been caring for them is unable or prevented from providing suitable accommoda­tion or care.  

The YJS are required to involve children’s so­cial care at the earliest opportunity to request that they look for a suitable placement for the child.  In certain circumstances, it may be appropriate to write to the director of children’s social care. The contact details, including email addresses, for all directors of children’s social care can be found online.  Even if no address is proposed, the court can still remand the child to local authority accom­modation with the expectation that accommoda­tion will be found.

Placements out of area 

Children’s social care can and does find specialist places out of the area for children. It may be ap­propriate to see what is available and how far they are willing to mitigate any risk the court deems the child poses. However, children’s social care should try to accommodate children in the most appropriate placement for the child.  This is espe­cially important given government recognition that there is meaningful scope to improve practice in this area to reduce custodial remands. 

In addition, section 44(1) of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 states: 

Every court in dealing with a child or young person who is brought before it, either as an offender or otherwise, shall have regard to the welfare of the child or young person and shall in a proper case take steps for removing him from undesirable surroundings, and for securing that proper provision is made for his education and training.

Local authority provision of accommodation under RLAA 

Local authorities have a legal duty to provide accommodation for all children remanded to local authority accommodation.  

Once a child is remanded to the local authori­ty, it is for the local authority to decide where they are placed. This can mean placement in non-se­cure local authority accommodation; in a foster home; in a children’s home; or, where appropriate, in the home of a family member or friend. It can even mean returning to the child’s home address. However, if the court is concerned about this, they can specify that the child is not to reside with a named person or at a named address.  

The local authority can apply to the court to place the child in a secure placement (a secure children’s home), where the child: 

(i) has a history of absconding and is likely to abscond from any other description of accommodation; and if the child absconds, is likely to suffer significant harm; or 

(ii) if kept in any other description of ac­commodation, is likely to injure themself or other persons.  

‘Looked after child’ status 

Every child remanded to youth detention accom­modation or to local authority accommodation is to be treated as a ‘looked after child’.  As a result, the designated local authority has certain respon­sibilities and the child has certain entitlements. 

Once a child is ‘looked after’, the local authori­ty has a duty to safeguard and promote that child’s welfare  and to make services available to the child as a parent would consider reasonable.  

This includes plans for the child’s health, care and educational needs. A looked after child plan should be agreed and put together within 10 days of the child’s RLLA.  There is statutory guidance for local authorities about the care planning and placement.  

Additionally, for children remanded to youth detention accommodation, Youth Justice Services are required to prepare a detention placement plan (DPP),  while children’s social care is required to prepare a Looked After Child plan.  This should include how the child will be supported after their period on remand comes to an end. They must also advise the Youth Custody Service (YCS) on the most suitable secure accommodation, visit the child in custody and carry out reviews for the child to assess their welfare, support and needs.  

If the remand lasts for 13 weeks or longer, as with other looked after children, the child or young person becomes eligible for ‘leaving care services’.  This means that the child should get advice and support for particular needs, including accommodation and financial assistance (includ­ing for higher education) by the responsible local authority.

The Youth Custody Service 

The YCS is the organisation responsible for the operational running of the youth secure estate.  It is the ultimate decision maker on the place­ment of a child who has been remanded to youth detention accommodation, taking into account the views of the YJS and children’s social care.  It is also required to work together with the YJS and children’s social care to ensure that a looked after child plan is in place, on planning for the child’s resettlement, and to support children by sharing risk and vulnerability assessments. 

Alternatives to remand accommodation 

The Review of Custodial Remand for Children in 2022 recognised that a high proportion of children in custody are there on remand and sought to en­hance accommodation and community provision to ensure robust alternatives to custody are avail­able.  As a result, they have funded two projects that aim to provide such an alternative. 

The London Accommodation Pathfinder (LAP) provides an alternative to youth detention accom­modation by operating up to four properties in London with capacity for 20 children aged 16 and 17. Through these placements, they offer targeted intervention and support with the aim of devel­oping the young person’s pro-social identity and independent skills.  

The Greater Manchester Remand Pilot has involved the pooling of remand funding across 10 different local authorities in the area. The ob­jective is to improve outcomes for children and reduce spend on remand. Alternative remand accommodation opened in late 2024, for which each child, aged 16 and 17, will be RLAA, subject to ISS conditions and robust supervision while accommodated in the property. Remand fostering options are also being explored for those 16 years old and under.

s44(1) Children and Young Persons Act 1933: Every court dealing with a child or young person must have regard to the welfare of that child or young person.

UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) Article 3 provides that: ‘In all actions concerning children ... the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.’

UNCRC Article 37(b) provides that the ‘detention ... of a child ... shall be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time’.

‘What’s wrong with remanding children to prison?’, Howard League for Penal Reform, September 2021.  This guide provides statistics and data about the over-use of remand for children.

‘Supporting children from custody into the community: A step by step guide’, Howard League for Penal Reform, December 2019.  This guide provides a detailed overview of support to which children are entitled and helps adults to support children’s positive reintegration into the community.

Equal Treatment Bench Book, Judicial College, July 2024 

Youth Court Bench Book, Judicial College, January 2024 

Youth Defendants in the Crown Court, Judicial College, 22 August 2022