Gisanrin & Ors, R. v
The sentencing judges were entitled to impose IPPs based on findings of dangerousness, seriousness of offences, and previous convictions; minimum terms were not manifestly excessive or wrong in principle; discrepancies in tariffs did not render other sentences excessive.
- Parties
- Prosecution: Regina; Applicant: Olutola Gisanrin; Applicant: Harjinder Khakh; Applicant: Sukhdev Khakh
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 05 March 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- applications for leave to appeal against sentence refused
- Legal Topics
- Kidnapping, Blackmail, Sentencing, Imprisonment for Public Protection, Dangerousness, Tariff, Disparity
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Regina
Prosecution
Olutola Gisanrin
Applicant
Harjinder Khakh
Applicant
Sukhdev Khakh
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 whether sentences of imprisonment for public protection (IPP) were appropriate
- 2 whether findings of dangerousness were justified
- 3 whether minimum terms (tariffs) were excessive or disparate
Ratio Decidendi
The sentencing judges were entitled to impose IPPs based on findings of dangerousness, seriousness of offences, and previous convictions; minimum terms were not manifestly excessive or wrong in principle; discrepancies in tariffs did not render other sentences excessive.
Court Disposition
applications for leave to appeal against sentence refused
Orders
- leave to appeal against sentence refused for Olutola Gisanrin
- leave to appeal against sentence refused for Harjinder Khakh
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