14 Jun 2023
Leave to appeal dismissed because the offending was deliberate and grossly disproportionate to any provocation; the lower courts correctly applied s 102 to the offence and offender; there is no reasonable prospect of establishing that a life sentence was manifestly unjust and no appearance of a miscarriage of justice or question of public importance warranting further appeal.
7 Aug 2019
Although the offence involved premeditation and a particularly vulnerable victim, the Court found the combination of severe, chronic carer burden, cumulative stress, a moderately severe recurrent major depressive disorder, longstanding mitigation factors, absence of prior offending, genuine remorse and low risk of reoffending made this case exceptional such that life imprisonment would be manifestly unjust; the appropriate finite sentence was 12 years with a minimum period of imprisonment of six years under s86.
16 Dec 2016
A life sentence would be manifestly unjust on these facts because the offender's culpability was significantly reduced by a unique combination of prolonged fulltime caregiving, exhaustion, perceived absence of viable medical options and the victim's profound vulnerability; a finite term of imprisonment was therefore appropriate and, after deductions for good character and guilty plea, four years' imprisonment was imposed.
18 Dec 2015
No special circumstances existed to render life imprisonment manifestly unjust because the defendant introduced a knife into a brawl, used grossly disproportionate force, acted impulsively while intoxicated and angry despite some provocation; imposed life imprisonment with a minimum period of 10 years and 6 months, with a concurrent six year sentence for wounding (accounting for uplift and discounts).