REGINA v. WATERMAN [2000] NSWCCA 29

REGINA v. WATERMAN [2000] NSWCCA 29

The application of the parity principle required intervention since there were no distinguishing features between the applicant and co-accused; hence the sentences should be reduced to avoid a justifiable sense of grievance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 February 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
['appeal' 'sentence' 'parity' 'disparity']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal' 'sentence' 'parity' 'disparity']

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 Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether sentencing disparity with co-accused justified intervention' 'Appropriateness of sentences imposed for offences of escaping lawful custody and disposing of stolen property']

Ratio Decidendi

The application of the parity principle required intervention since there were no distinguishing features between the applicant and co-accused; hence the sentences should be reduced to avoid a justifiable sense of grievance.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted' 'Sentences imposed in the District Court quashed' 'Applicant sentenced to a fixed term expiring 23 February 2000 on count two (escape lawful custody), commencing 18 October 1999' 'Applicant sentenced to a fixed term of six months for count one (receiving stolen property), dated from 25...