Congdon v Att. Gen. [2002] JLR_Note 12 (12 February 2002)

Congdon v Att. Gen. [2002] JLR_Note 12 (12 February 2002)

The sentence for fraudulent conversion must reflect the gravity of the offence while taking into account any mitigating circumstances presented by the applicant.

Parties
Applicant: Congdon; Respondent: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
12 February 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
sentence imposed
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Conversion, Sentence, Mitigation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Congdon

Applicant

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

  1. 1 What is the appropriate sentence for fraudulent conversion?
  2. 2 What mitigating factors should be considered in sentencing for fraudulent conversion?

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence for fraudulent conversion must reflect the gravity of the offence while taking into account any mitigating circumstances presented by the applicant.

Court Disposition

sentence imposed