Table 1: Outcome of legal aid applications for persons “accused of sexual assault¹⁰

year	grants	refusals	applications received
2000	643	73	736
2001	557	90	648
2002	321	367	367
TOTAL	1521	201	1731

Table 2: Reasons for refusal of legal aid to persons “charged with sexual assault¹¹

reason for refusal	2000	2001	2002
Guidelines	8	4	6
Guidelines and Means	1	2	3
Means	35	53	18
Means, Merits and Guidelines12	0	1	0
Merit	3	3	0
Merit and Guidelines	2	3	1
Other	6	9	5
Withdrawn13	18	15	5
ANNUAL TOTAL OF REFUSALS	73	90	38

10. Source: B Donnellan, NSW Legal Aid Commission (14 May, 2003). Note that the statistics are limited to sexual assault offences only, they do not include legal aid applicants who have been accused of other sexual offences. Further, for all the years listed, the composite figures do not add up to the total number of applications received in that year. This is because, in any given time period, not all applications received are determined, and conversely, not all applications determined were received in that same period. This is particularly so in appellate matters where the Commission may need additional time to determine the merit of a proposed appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal on a sexual assault conviction.

11. Source: B Donnellan, NSW Legal Aid Commission (14 May, 2003). Note that the statistics are limited to sexual assault offences only, they do not relate to persons accused of other sexual offences.

12. In most cases, a combined merits/means test will only apply to an applicant accused of a sexual offence in the event that he or she decided to appeal against a conviction at trial. However, there are certain exceptions and restrictions on the availability of aid that are dependent upon the precise nature of the appeal.

13. There are numerous, and often complex, reasons why accused persons withdraw their applications for legal aid prior to the determination of that application. Some reasons may be that charges are dropped or varied, and/or pleas are changed. Withdrawals may also relate to applicants who intended to self-fund the litigation if possible, but lodged an application for legal aid as a safety net, and subsequently found themselves in a position to self-fund. Some may also withdraw when it becomes apparent that a private solicitor of choice will not be approved if legal aid is granted. In many other cases the reasons are unknown, as the Legal Aid Commission is simply not privy to the reason/s why some applicants choose to withdraw an application.