Bubanja, 33, applied for bail in the Supreme Court in Sydney after being held in custody since his arrest in September.

The Shell Cove man has been charged with 12 offences including rape, assault, destroying property, intentionally choking, causing grievous bodily harm and intimidating a woman in 2020.

Read more: $500k opal heist: Police hunt thieves after Albion Park Rail home invasion

During the bail hearing on Tuesday, Bubanja's defence lawyer Arjun Chhabra suggested the Crown case was not strong and strict conditions could mitigate bail concerns.

Mr Chhabra said the Crown's case was dependent on the credibility of the woman's evidence, claiming she had given two different versions of events to police in as many days.

The court heard the woman reported the alleged assault to police on September 30 but then recanted her statement less than 24 hours later.

"The prosecution case...is going to face incredible hurdles to get to the requisite standard at trial and for plain reasons this is a matter that will clearly proceed to trial," Mr Chhabra said.

He said there was "little or nil motivation" for his client to interfere with the woman evidence, saying her fresh statement appeared to be favourable to the defence case.

Mr Chhabra said the bail concern of failure to appear was low because his client was "looking down the barrel of an acquittal" and had little motivation to flee or not turn up to court.

He proposed Bubanja be released on strict bail conditions including house arrest, reporting to police three times a day and a significant surety.

In opposing bail, the Crown prosecutor said it was "not unusual" for a woman to recant her allegations and noted the matters were "really serious".

"The fact she acts strangely, or comes forward with a retraction, is really not unusual at all," the prosecutor said.

He also said the woman "remains at risk".

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Rothman also noted it was not unusual for a complainant to recant their allegations.

"On October 1, 2020, the complainant recanted it seems to police and made clear she lied to police on September 30," he said.

"It seems however that the original complaint was immediately after the occurrences of events, which were said ultimately to be consensual and didn't involve the infliction of violence."

Judge Rothman said Bubanja had been charged with serious offences of violence and his criminal history was "significant".

"These allegations refer to conduct that occurred in May or June 2020. On the criminal history, it seems the applicant was released from prison after a non-parole period at the end of March," he said.

"Prior to that the applicant had been charged with significant offences involving violence, some of which he was found guilty of, one he was found guilty of by a jury and the conviction quashed by the Court of Criminal Appeal.

"I do not have the judgement before be but frankly do not take that into account in determining the applicant's history.

"But I do take it into account in determining what is probably the perception of the applicant by the alleged victim.

"I'm not prepared at this point, without having seen or heard from the complainant, to determine that first version is unbelievable."

Judge Rothman refused bail and the case will next appear in Wollongong Local Court on March 10.

We depend on subscription revenue to support our journalism. If you are able, please subscribe here. If you are already a subscriber, thank you for your support.