29 Sept 2022
The respondent deliberately produced false documents to procure the lift of a travel restriction and to abscond from prosecution; that conduct constituted criminal contempt which gravely undermined public confidence in the administration of justice and warranted a custodial sentence of 3 years and 6 months imprisonment.
21 Apr 2022
The conviction was upheld because the trial judge's factual findings that the six receipts were false and that the appellant acted dishonestly with the intention to deceive his employer were supported by the evidence; the prosecution proved the charges beyond reasonable doubt and there was no demonstrable error warranting interference on appeal.
20 Jun 2019
The claim was dismissed because the two documents relied upon by the plaintiff were found to be false and, combined with pervasive lies and inconsistent evidence from both parties, left no reliable basis to find an employment relationship; even assuming the magistracy conviction could shift the burden, the plaintiff failed to establish breach and causation, so judgment for the plaintiff could not be made.
3 Sept 2003
The magistrate was entitled to find the documents false on the basis of unconnected corporate witnesses and forensic evidence and to reject the appellant's account as wholly implausible; there was no error in the magistrate's reasoning warranting intervention, so the convictions were upheld.
9 Oct 1981
The court held there was no gross disparity between the appellant's sentence and those of others; the trial judge properly considered the guilty plea and other factors; prior sentences were inadequate and should not be perpetuated; therefore there was no basis to reduce the appellant's sentence and the appeal was dismissed.
12 Dec 1968
Where offences effectively amount to a single series of transactions, sentences should run concurrently; the appellant's prior convictions did not justify consecutive sentences totalling 12 months, and the appropriate order was to make the two 6-month sentences concurrent.