Assi v R; Jomaa v R [2021] NSWCCA 181

Assi v R; Jomaa v R [2021] NSWCCA 181

The difference between the sentences imposed on Assi and Jomaa was not gross, marked, or unjustified; the extra seriousness of Jomaa's role as a licensed customs broker was offset by Assi's record and relative seriousness of included offences. The error in taking into account s 16A(2)(fa)(ii) Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) for Jomaa did not warrant reduction of sentence as no lesser sentence was justified on an independent discretionary assessment.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 August 2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence (criminal) / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment Determining Appeals Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeals dismissed, with leave to appeal granted to both applicants.
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'importation of Tobacco' 'conspiracy' 'parity Principle' 'breach of Trust' 'appeals Against Sentence']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'importation of Tobacco' 'conspiracy' 'parity Principle' 'breach of Trust' 'appeals Against 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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence (criminal) / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment Determining Appeals Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether parity principle required different sentences for Assi and Jomaa given their respective roles and circumstances' 'Whether sentencing judge erred by taking into account s 16A(2)(fa)(ii) Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) in relation to Jomaa as a licensed customs broker']

Ratio Decidendi

The difference between the sentences imposed on Assi and Jomaa was not gross, marked, or unjustified; the extra seriousness of Jomaa's role as a licensed customs broker was offset by Assi's record and relative seriousness of included offences. The error in taking into account s 16A(2)(fa)(ii) Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) for Jomaa did not warrant reduction of sentence as no lesser sentence was justified on an independent discretionary assessment.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed, with leave to appeal granted to both applicants.

Orders

  • ['Jomaa: (1) Leave to appeal granted; (2) Appeal dismissed.' 'Assi: (1) Leave to appeal granted; (2) Appeal dismissed.']