Rayner v Att. Gen. [1996] JLR_Note 16b (25 September 1996)
The court held that disparity in sentencing is only permissible where justified by material differences in the circumstances of the offenders or the offences.
- Parties
- Applicant: Rayner; Respondent: Attorney General
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Judgment Date
- 25 September 1996
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Sentence Disparity
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
Parties
Rayner
Applicant
Attorney General
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there was an unjustified disparity between sentences imposed
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that disparity in sentencing is only permissible where justified by material differences in the circumstances of the offenders or the offences.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
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