R v Zaky, Manerva [2014] NSWDC 388

R v Zaky, Manerva [2014] NSWDC 388

The offender engaged in an approximately 11-year course of continuing, deliberate and complex fraud involving repeated misrepresentations to obtain rent assistance from the Commonwealth while living in a home owned by her husband under another name. The amount and duration of the offending, the extensive deceit, and the need for general and specific deterrence made full-time imprisonment necessary. Her physical disabilities, mental health, lack of prior convictions, low risk of reoffending and late repayment were considered, but did not justify a non-custodial sentence or establish significant remorse. Separate sentences with partial accumulation were imposed to reflect the different...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence / Sentence After Jury Verdicts of Guilty on Two Counts
Outcome
Convicted on each count and sentenced to imprisonment, with a recognisance release order after 10 months of the total sentence and a reparation order.
Legal Topics
['defraud the Commonwealth' 'dishonestly Obtain Financial Advantage by Deception' 'rent Assistance' 'reparation Order' 'recognisance Release Order' 'general Deterrence']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'commonwealth Fraud' 'social Security Fraud'] ['defraud the Commonwealth' 'dishonestly Obtain Financial Advantage by Deception' 'rent Assistance' 'reparation Order' 'recognisance Release Order' 'general Deterrence']

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 After Jury Verdicts of Guilty on Two Counts

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["What sentence should be imposed for the offender's convictions for defrauding the Commonwealth and dishonestly obtaining a financial advantage by deception." 'Whether any alternative to full-time imprisonment was appropriate given the duration, amount and complexity of the fraud.' 'Whether remorse, repayment, physical disability, mental health, lack of prior criminal history and low risk of reoffending mitigated sentence.' 'Whether the sentences for the two offences should be concurrent or partly accumulated.' 'Whether a recognisance release order and reparation order should be made.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offender engaged in an approximately 11-year course of continuing, deliberate and complex fraud involving repeated misrepresentations to obtain rent assistance from the Commonwealth while living in a home owned by her husband under another name. The amount and duration of the offending, the extensive deceit, and the need for general and specific deterrence made full-time imprisonment necessary. Her physical disabilities, mental health, lack of prior convictions, low risk of reoffending and late repayment were considered, but did not justify a non-custodial sentence or establish significant remorse. Separate sentences with partial accumulation were imposed to reflect the different...

Court Disposition

Convicted on each count and sentenced to imprisonment, with a recognisance release order after 10 months of the total sentence and a reparation order.

Orders

  • ['Count 1: For the offence contrary to s 29D of the Crimes Act 1914, sentenced to imprisonment for 6 months commencing on 28 November 2014 and expiring on 27 May 2015.' 'Count 2: For the offence contrary to s 134.2(1) of the Criminal Code 1995, pursuant to s20(1)(b) of the Crimes Act 1914 (CTH), sentenced to...