Lambert v Rex [2025] EWCA Crim 137 (04 February 2025)
The notional single sentences imposed were too high and the overall custodial term of 18 years was manifestly excessive; a just and proportionate sentence, applying the totality principle and considering mitigation, is 14 years' imprisonment with an extended licence period of four years.
- Citation
- [2025] EWCA Crim 137
- Parties
- Appellant: Gareth Lambert; Respondent: Rex
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 04 February 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; sentences on counts 1 and 2 quashed and substituted.
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Sexual Offences, Appeal Procedure, Totality Principle
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Gareth Lambert
Appellant
Rex
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentences imposed for rape and sexual assault were manifestly excessive
- 2 Whether the judge erred in applying the Sentencing Council Guidelines and the totality principle
Ratio Decidendi
The notional single sentences imposed were too high and the overall custodial term of 18 years was manifestly excessive; a just and proportionate sentence, applying the totality principle and considering mitigation, is 14 years' imprisonment with an extended licence period of four years.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; sentences on counts 1 and 2 quashed and substituted.
Orders
- On count 1, sentence substituted to six years and six months' imprisonment with an extended licence period of two years.
- On count 2, sentence substituted to seven years and six months' imprisonment with an extended licence period of two years, to run consecutively to count 1.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment