R v Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCCA 280

R v Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCCA 280

The Court held that there is no textual constraint requiring the Court of Criminal Appeal to resentence rather than remit, and no primacy of s 5D over s 12(2). Because the Respondent was not in custody, remittal would preserve the usual appeal rights of both parties, and the Respondent was considering adducing further evidence that the Crown may seek to test or challenge, it was appropriate to remit the matter to a single judge of the Common Law Division for sentencing in accordance with the High Court's decision in Jacobs Group.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing Appeal Procedural Ruling / Redetermination After High Court Remittal; Application/question Whether to Remit for Resentencing
Outcome
Matter remitted to a single judge of the Common Law Division for sentencing in accordance with R v Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd [2023] HCA 23.
Legal Topics
['resentencing' 'remittal to Court of Trial' 'court of Criminal Appeal Powers' 'foreign Bribery Offences' 'maximum Penalty Calculation']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['resentencing' 'remittal to Court of Trial' 'court of Criminal Appeal Powers' 'foreign Bribery Offences' 'maximum Penalty Calculation']

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 Sentencing Appeal Procedural Ruling / Redetermination After High Court Remittal; Application/question Whether to Remit for Resentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the resentencing exercise should be undertaken by the Court of Criminal Appeal or remitted to a single judge of the Supreme Court for resentencing pursuant to s 12(2) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW).' 'Whether s 12(2) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) requires a positive circumstance impeding the Court of Criminal Appeal from resentencing or making a trial court better suited to resentencing.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that there is no textual constraint requiring the Court of Criminal Appeal to resentence rather than remit, and no primacy of s 5D over s 12(2). Because the Respondent was not in custody, remittal would preserve the usual appeal rights of both parties, and the Respondent was considering adducing further evidence that the Crown may seek to test or challenge, it was appropriate to remit the matter to a single judge of the Common Law Division for sentencing in accordance with the High Court's decision in Jacobs Group.

Court Disposition

Matter remitted to a single judge of the Common Law Division for sentencing in accordance with R v Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd [2023] HCA 23.

Orders

  • ['Remit the matter to a single judge of the Common Law Division for sentencing in accordance with R v Jacobs Group (Australia) Pty Ltd [2023] HCA 23.']