Gavin Mark RIDLEY v REGINA [2008] NSWCCA 324

Reported Decision: 192 A Crim R 139

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION: Gavin Mark RIDLEY v REGINA [2008] NSWCCA 324

HEARING DATE(S): 12 September 2008

JUDGMENT DATE: 18 December 2008

JUDGMENT OF: Allsop P at 1; Johnson J at 99; Price J at 100

1. Appeal against conviction dismissed. DECISION: 2. Leave to appeal against sentence granted. 3. Appeal against sentence dismissed.

CATCHWORDS: TAXATION – SALES TAX – TAX EVASION – administration of Goods & Services Tax scheme – Business Activity Statements lodged with Australian Tax Office – input tax credits improperly claimed – serious fraud against the revenue - CRIMINAL APPEAL – CONVICITION – alleged failure to give directions – directions said to be inadequate – directions said to be misdirections. - CRIMINAL APPEAL – SENTENCE – considerations said not to be legitimate – weight given to specific deterrence – sentence said to be manifestly excessive.

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) Criminal Code 1995 (Cth)

PARTIES: Gavin Mark RIDLEY REGINA

FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 3833/2007

COUNSEL: Mr P Lowe Mr P Roberts SC

SOLICITORS: Mr P Bodiscoe

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 06/11/0192

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Sorby DCJ

LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION: 3 August 2007

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL 3833/2007 ALLSOP P JOHNSON J PRICE J 18 December 2008 Gavin Mark RIDLEY v REGINA JUDGMENT

1 ALLSOP P: Gavin Mark Ridley (the appellant) appeals against his conviction and sentence following a jury verdict in respect of a trial in the District Court between 2 and 22 May 2007. 2 On 2 May 2007, the appellant pleaded not guilty to twelve counts on an indictment, nine counts relating to defrauding the Commonwealth contrary to the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), s 29D and three counts of attempt by deception to dishonestly obtain a financial advantage contrary to the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth), ss 134.2 and 11.1. 3 The jury convicted the appellant on all twelve counts. 4 On 3 August 2007, Sorby DCJ sentenced the appellant in respect of each of the charges on which he had been found guilty to an effective overall period of imprisonment of 8 years with a non-parole period of 5 years.