R v Buckley [2002] NSWCCA 44

R v Buckley [2002] NSWCCA 44

The applicant's offending was one of the most serious examples of fraudulent financial dishonesty, involving false inducements to investors, no actual foreign currency trading, use of victims' money for his own benefit and losses in the order of one million dollars or more. In those circumstances the sentences and the six-year non-parole period within an eight-year total sentence were justified, and reducing the non-parole period would make the overall sentence disproportionate to the seriousness of the crimes.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 February 2002
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Sentence
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['fraudulent Financial Dishonesty' 'non Parole Period' 'sentence Appeal' 'commonwealth Offences and New South Wales Offences']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['fraudulent Financial Dishonesty' 'non Parole Period' 'sentence Appeal' 'commonwealth Offences and New South Wales Offences']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentence imposed for multiple financial dishonesty offences should be varied.' 'Whether the non-parole period of six years in an overall sentence of eight years should be reduced as disproportionate.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's offending was one of the most serious examples of fraudulent financial dishonesty, involving false inducements to investors, no actual foreign currency trading, use of victims' money for his own benefit and losses in the order of one million dollars or more. In those circumstances the sentences and the six-year non-parole period within an eight-year total sentence were justified, and reducing the non-parole period would make the overall sentence disproportionate to the seriousness of the crimes.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Application for leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']