21 Oct 2013
Given the substantial overstay of 4 years 8 months and absence of employment, a 6 months starting point was not manifestly excessive and the overall sentence of 3 months and 3 weeks (including one week extra credit for surrender and the plea) was appropriate; appeal against sentence is dismissed.
16 Nov 2011
Given an overstay of approximately 8 years 6 months and relevant precedents, a custodial sentence of 6 months was within the permissible range and not manifestly excessive; surrender and personal circumstances did not justify interference with the Magistrate's sentence, so the appeal fails.
7 Jul 2010
Although the appellant's humanitarian claim was of doubtful genuineness, his voluntary surrender to the authorities (and the 18 days' detention) warranted an additional reduction of sentence; balancing the circumstances and precedent, a further 3 months discount was appropriate, reducing the sentence from 14 to 11 months imprisonment.
28 May 2010
The court held that the sentencing judge erred in reducing the normal one-third discount because the applicant had not surrendered; a timely plea entered at first appearance entitled the applicant to the full one-third discount. Although the 'bank account' feature and brief detention were significant aggravating factors, the appellate court was satisfied the appropriate starting point of nine years (pre-plea) need not be disturbed on these facts; applying the full one-third discount reduced the sentence to six years, and the seven year sentence was set aside and substituted with six years imp…
8 Jun 2005
For substantial overstays of roughly eight years or more by non-working overstayers, a custodial sentence comparable to six months imprisonment is appropriate; the magistrate's apparent 15-month starting point was excessive and the sentence is reduced to six months to maintain consistency with comparable cases.
28 Jan 2000
Regardless of motive for surrender, the act of surrender itself is a mitigating factor that justified a six month reduction of the overall 18 month sentence, resulting in substitution of a 12 month sentence with specified concurrent and consecutive allocation between charges.
3 May 1995
The Court held that the judge did not err in principle: the applicant's voluntary return without restitution did not merit a greater discount, the five-year starting point was appropriate for extensive, premeditated deception, and the sentence of three years and four months was not manifestly excessive; the application for leave to appeal was dismissed.