R v GREEN AND QUINN [2011] NSWCCA 71

R v GREEN AND QUINN [2011] NSWCCA 71

Even if the Court had power to correct the orders or increase the sentences to match the majority's intention, the discretion should not be exercised in this case due to the prejudice and additional hardship correction would cause to the respondents and in light of finality and the public interest being otherwise served.

Parties
Applicant: Regina; Respondent: Brett Andrew Green; Respondent: Shane Darrin Quinn
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application to Correct or Vary Orders/sentences Post Judgment
Outcome
To the extent that the Crown has made an application under Rule 50C, dismiss the application and otherwise decline to vary or correct the orders of the Court and the sentences imposed on 17 December 2010.
Legal Topics
Slip Rule, Correction of Orders, Finality of Judgment, Crown Appeals, Sentence Variation
Criminal Law Appeal Procedure Slip Rule Correction of Orders Finality of Judgment Crown Appeals Sentence Variation

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 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Applicant

Brett Andrew Green

Respondent

Shane Darrin Quinn

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application to Correct or Vary Orders/sentences Post Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court has power to correct or vary its entered sentencing orders to reflect its real intention (difference between reasons and formal orders)
  2. 2 Whether such power derives from Rule 50C, the slip rule, or inherent power
  3. 3 If power exists, whether discretion should be exercised to correct orders

Ratio Decidendi

Even if the Court had power to correct the orders or increase the sentences to match the majority's intention, the discretion should not be exercised in this case due to the prejudice and additional hardship correction would cause to the respondents and in light of finality and the public interest being otherwise served.

Court Disposition

To the extent that the Crown has made an application under Rule 50C, dismiss the application and otherwise decline to vary or correct the orders of the Court and the sentences imposed on 17 December 2010.

Orders

  • Application under Rule 50C dismissed.
  • No variation or correction of orders or sentences imposed on 17 December 2010.