R v Cornell [2013] NSWDC 246

R v Cornell [2013] NSWDC 246

Ms Cornell's conduct was seriously dishonest, involved an insurance claim, and required punishment and general deterrence, so a bond under s 9 or s 12 was insufficient and a sentence of imprisonment of two years was the only appropriate penalty. However, the exceptional consequences for her daughter if Ms Cornell were imprisoned full-time justified not sending her to gaol immediately and instead referring her for assessment for service of the sentence by intensive correction order, with compensation to be paid to Allianz Insurance Limited.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 September 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence / Sentence After Trial and Jury Verdict
Outcome
Referred for assessment as to suitability to serve a sentence of imprisonment by way of an intensive correction order; bail granted pending further listing; compensation ordered to Allianz Insurance Limited.
Legal Topics
['dishonestly Damaging Property' 'insurance Fraud' 'hardship to a Third Person' 'general Deterrence' 'parity' 'intensive Correction Order' 'compensation']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['dishonestly Damaging Property' 'insurance Fraud' 'hardship to a Third Person' 'general Deterrence' 'parity' 'intensive Correction Order' 'compensation']

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 Trial and Jury Verdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for dishonestly damaging property in connection with an insurance claim.' "Whether exceptional hardship to the offender's daughter justified avoiding full-time imprisonment." 'Whether a bond under s 9 or a suspended sentence under s 12 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act was appropriate.' 'Whether compensation should be ordered to Allianz Insurance Limited.' "Whether parity with Mr Barbour's Local Court sentence affected the appropriate sentence."]

Ratio Decidendi

Ms Cornell's conduct was seriously dishonest, involved an insurance claim, and required punishment and general deterrence, so a bond under s 9 or s 12 was insufficient and a sentence of imprisonment of two years was the only appropriate penalty. However, the exceptional consequences for her daughter if Ms Cornell were imprisoned full-time justified not sending her to gaol immediately and instead referring her for assessment for service of the sentence by intensive correction order, with compensation to be paid to Allianz Insurance Limited.

Court Disposition

Referred for assessment as to suitability to serve a sentence of imprisonment by way of an intensive correction order; bail granted pending further listing; compensation ordered to Allianz Insurance Limited.

Orders

  • ['Ms Cornell is referred for assessment as to her suitability to serve the sentence of imprisonment by way of an intensive correction order.' 'Bail is granted to Ms Cornell until 19 December 2013.' "The matter is listed at 2 o'clock on 19 December 2013." 'Compensation is to be paid by Ms Cornell to Allianz Insurance...