5 Feb 2026
Bail pending appeal was granted because the court gave leave to appeal on substantial and plainly arguable grounds and concluded there was a real possibility the sentence would be reduced (by increasing the guilty plea and assistance discounts) such that the applicant's immediate release would be warranted.
11 Jul 2025
The court held that the judge did not err in principle or impose a manifestly excessive sentence: given the defendant sold and permitted use of his account to a criminal group, received payment, and the volume and duration of transactions, an 18‑month starting point was reasonable and the one‑third reduction for the guilty plea to 12 months was appropriate; appeal dismissed.
19 Mar 2021
The court must assess assistance on the basis of whether it is "of practical use" (which includes criminal intelligence and is not limited to tangible results), and law enforcement and prosecutors must properly evaluate and, where appropriate, disclose that assessment to the sentencing court so the defendant can receive any justified additional discount.
29 Dec 2015
On the admitted facts the recognised starting point of 30 months for burglary of non-domestic premises applied and a one-third discount for an early plea was properly given, yielding 20 months; there are no reasonably arguable grounds to challenge the sentence and leave to appeal is refused.
15 Sept 2015
Even if the judge had accepted that one packet was for self-consumption and that reduced the notional trafficking quantity slightly, that potential reduction was effectively counteracted by the applicant's substantial and relevant prior convictions and accumulated sentences; therefore there was no arguable ground that the final sentence of 5 years 4 months was manifestly excessive or wrong in principle and the application for leave to appeal was refused.
2 Jun 2004
The court held that a 7‑year starting point was within established principle given the applicant's recidivism and importation aggravating factor, that the reduction to 50 months exceeded the one‑third guilty plea discount (thus also reflecting credit for co‑operation), and that the judge's numerical error about prior convictions was immaterial; therefore there was no arguable ground for leave to appeal and leave was refused.
18 Feb 2000
The court held that voluntary withdrawal can attract a modest reduction in sentence and allowed limited reductions for the 1st and 3rd appellants; statements in mitigation that rendered the 2nd appellant's plea equivocal meant his plea was a nullity so his conviction and sentence were set aside and the matter remitted for trial; assistants with lesser roles could be dealt with by suspension of sentence. The magistrate's general approach to custody for large-scale operations was upheld but specific mitigation required adjustment for certain appellants.
17 Nov 1999
The appeal is dismissed because the magistrate acted within sentencing discretion: starting point of 12 months reduced to nine months was justified and withholding the full one-third discount due to delay in plea was a proper exercise of discretion; there was no error of principle nor manifest excess to warrant interference.
4 Jun 1999
The court held that the applicant could withdraw his notice of abandonment as a nullity because it was made in the context of being refused legal aid, but on the merits the plea was not entered at the earliest opportunity (initial not guilty plea and matter listed for trial) so the judge was entitled to give less than the full one‑third discount; accordingly leave to appeal out of time was refused and the sentence as reduced to five years was appropriate.
11 May 1999
The Court held there was no merit in the appeal; the sentencing judge properly selected starting points, correctly treated the immigration offence as aggravated by prior unlawful entries and prior offending, appropriately applied discounts for plea, and the asserted medical grounds did not justify reducing the imposed sentences; the application was dismissed but three months of custody were ordered not to count towards the sentence.