R v Afram [2021] NSWDC 845

R v Afram [2021] NSWDC 845

The offending was a serious example of causing a financial advantage by deception because it involved planned and organised conduct over about a year, false weighbridge documents and invoices, approximately 600 counterfeit waste disposal dockets, significant contaminated waste including asbestos, non-payment of the EPA levy, and exposure of Ertech and others to significant financial disadvantage. However, after allowing a combined 35% discount for the guilty plea and past assistance, taking into account 14 days already spent in custody, the offender's low risk of reoffending, remorse, health and family circumstances, and especially his care responsibilities for his daughter, a sentence of...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence / Sentence Following Guilty Plea
Outcome
The offender was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 2 years, to be served by way of an Intensive Correction Order commencing on 24 June 2021.
Legal Topics
['cause a Financial Advantage by Deception' 'belated Guilty Plea' 'rolled Up Charge' 'false Weighbridge Documents and Invoices' 'illegal Dumping of Contaminated Soil Waste Including Asbestos' 'intensive Correction Order' 'subjective Circumstances' 'assistance to Authorities']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'environmental Regulation'] ['cause a Financial Advantage by Deception' 'belated Guilty Plea' 'rolled Up Charge' 'false Weighbridge Documents and Invoices' 'illegal Dumping of Contaminated Soil Waste Including Asbestos' 'intensive Correction Order' 'subjective Circumstances' 'assistance to Authorities']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentence / Sentence Following Guilty Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for the offence of causing a financial advantage by deception contrary to s 192E(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1900.' 'How the seriousness of the planned and organised offending, including false disposal documents and illegal dumping of contaminated waste, should be assessed.' 'What discounts should be allowed for the belated guilty plea and for matters under s 23 of the Crime (Sentencing Procedure) Act.' 'Whether the sentence of imprisonment should be served by way of an Intensive Correction Order.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offending was a serious example of causing a financial advantage by deception because it involved planned and organised conduct over about a year, false weighbridge documents and invoices, approximately 600 counterfeit waste disposal dockets, significant contaminated waste including asbestos, non-payment of the EPA levy, and exposure of Ertech and others to significant financial disadvantage. However, after allowing a combined 35% discount for the guilty plea and past assistance, taking into account 14 days already spent in custody, the offender's low risk of reoffending, remorse, health and family circumstances, and especially his care responsibilities for his daughter, a sentence of...

Court Disposition

The offender was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 2 years, to be served by way of an Intensive Correction Order commencing on 24 June 2021.

Orders

  • ['The offender is convicted of the offence.' 'There being no other appropriate penalty, a sentence of imprisonment of 2 years is imposed.' 'Pursuant to section 7(1) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, the sentence is to be served by way of an Intensive Corrections Order commencing on 24 June 2021.' 'The...