Reddy v R (No 2) [2018] NSWCCA 234

Reddy v R (No 2) [2018] NSWCCA 234

The Court's correction of Order 3 was necessary due to a patent error in the calculation of backdating the sentence commencement date, and it has power to do so under the slip rule and relevant procedural rules without causing injustice to either party.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Consequential Order / Amendment
Outcome
Order amended to correct errors in dates
Legal Topics
['correction of Orders' 'slip Rule' 'parole Eligibility' 'backdating of Sentence']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing Procedure'] ['correction of Orders' 'slip Rule' 'parole Eligibility' 'backdating of Sentence']

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

Criminal Appeal / Consequential Order / Amendment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the original order contained a patent arithmetic error in calculating backdating of the sentence commencement date' 'Whether the Court has power to amend the orders under the slip rule and relevant procedural rules']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court's correction of Order 3 was necessary due to a patent error in the calculation of backdating the sentence commencement date, and it has power to do so under the slip rule and relevant procedural rules without causing injustice to either party.

Court Disposition

Order amended to correct errors in dates

Orders

  • ['Order 3 pronounced on 3 October 2018 is amended by substituting October for November wherever it appears and substituting March for April in Order 3(a).']