PC v R [2020] NSWCCA 147

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: PC v R [2020] NSWCCA 147 Hearing dates: 29 April 2020 Decision date: 01 July 2020 Before: Bathurst CJ at [1]; Hoeben CJ at CL at [2]; Harrison J at [143] Decision: (1) Leave to appeal granted. (2) The appeal is dismissed. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – appeal against sentence – 11 offences of dishonestly obtaining a financial advantage by deception – 10 further offences of the same kind on three Forms 1 – $3.6 million unaccounted for – whether sentencing judge erred in failing to assess the objective seriousness of the offences – whether sufficient discount for assistance to authorities allowed – whether sentence imposed was manifestly excessive – objective seriousness of offences properly assessed – no error in discount allowed for assistance – sentence not manifestly excessive – error in formulation of indicative sentences – requirement to set out basis for differences between indicative sentences – error in formulation of indicative sentences not sufficient to require change in the aggregate sentence – appeal against sentence dismissed. Legislation Cited: Court Suppression and Non-Publication Orders Act 2010) (NSW) – s 7 Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) – s 192E(1)(b) Crimes Amendment (Fraud Identity and Forgery Offences) Act 2009 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) – ss 21A, 23 Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) – s 5(1)(c) Cases Cited: AB v The Queen [1999] HCA 46;198 CLR 111 Barbaro v The Queen; Zirilli v The Queen (2014) CLR 253 CLR 58; [2014] HCA 2 Baumer v The Queen [1988] HCA 67; 166 CLR 51 Bland v R (2014) 241 A Crim R 51/ [2014] NSWCCA 82 Book v R [2018] NSWCCA 58 Cahyardi v Regina [2007] NSWCCA 1; 168 A Crim R 41 DV v R [2017] NSWCCA 276 Frigiani v R [2007] NSWCCA 81 Gal v R [2015] NSWCCA 242 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 Haouchar v R [2014] NSWCCA 227 Hili v R; Jones v R [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 Hraiki v R [2019] NSWCCA 140 Hughes v R [2013] NSWCCA 129 Hurst v R [2017] NSWCCA 114 Hutchinson v R [2014] NSWCCA 317 JM v R; [2014] NSWCCA 297; 246 A Crim R 528 Johnston v R [2017] NSWCCA 54 Kentwell v The Queen [2014] HCA 37; 88 ALJR 947 Kerr v R [2016] NSWCCA 218 LB v R [2013] NSWCCA 70 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 Matthew v R [2014] NSWCCA 185 Mitchell v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 72 Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39; 244 CLR 120 Obeid v R [2017] NSWCCA 221 PG v R (2017) 268 A Crim R 61; [2017] NSWCCA 179 Pearce v The Queen [1998] HCA 57; 194 CLR 610 Power v Regina [2002] NSWCCA 244 R v Brown [2012] NSWCCA 199 R v Campbell [2014] NSWCCA 102 R v Ehrlich [2012] NSWCCA 35 R v El Hani [2004] NSWCCA 162 R v Hammoud (2000) 118 A Crim R 66; [2000] NSWCCA 540 R v Hawker [2001] NSWCCA 148 R v Martin [2005] NSWCCA 190 R v Medd (a pseudonym) [2016] NSWCCA 216 R v Sappideen [2018] NSWDC 238 R v Van Ryn [2016] NSWCCA 1 R v Woodman [2001] NSWCCA 310 R v XX [2009] NSWCCA 115 R v XX [2017] NSWCCA 90 Regina v Simpson [2001] NSWCCA 534; 53 NSWLR 704 Regina v Joseph Sukkar [2006] NSWCCA 92 Regina v Swadling [2004] NSWCCA 421 Robinson v R [2017] NSWCCA 315 Sharma v R [2017] NSWCCA 85 Siwek v R [2017] NSWCCA 178 Subramaniam v R [2013] NSWCCA 159 Thi Lan Nguyen v R [2009] NSWCCA 181 TL v R [2017] NSWCCA 308 Veen v R (No 2) [1988] HCA 14; 164 CLR 465 Woods v R [2018] NSWCCA 261 Z v R [2014] NSWCCA 323 Zhao v R [2016] NSWCCA 179 Category: Principal judgment Parties: PC – Applicant Regina – Respondent Crown Representation: Counsel: T Game SC/A Cook – Applicant E Balodis – Respondent Crown