
Criminal judgments from Australian courts and tribunals, with a plain-English summary, the legal holding and frequently asked questions.
The NSW Supreme Court sentenced a man to 9 years in prison for manslaughter. The court considered the defendant's intoxication, lack of prior violent history, and the need for general deterrence in determining the sentence.
The appeal was successful because the lower court did not provide enough reasons explaining why a forensic procedure was necessary for an offender. The court stressed the importance of detailed explanations in such decisions.
In a criminal trial, the court refused to discharge the jury despite delays in presenting evidence. The refusal was based on the advanced stage of the trial and the fact that the accused had access to experienced counsel.
The Court of Criminal Appeal rejected an appeal challenging a sentence for armed robbery. The claimant argued for a greater discount for assisting authorities, but the court found the original sentence appropriate.
In this case, the Court of Criminal Appeal dismissed an appeal against sentence, upholding the original sentence despite errors in the sentencing process. The appeal was brought by a defendant who argued that the judge failed to consider all pre-sentence custody and erroneously referenced a good behaviour bond during sentencing.
An employer was fined for failing to ensure a safe system of work at a manufacturing facility, resulting in unsafe practices and a breach of occupational health and safety laws. The court convicted the employer and imposed a fine of $90,000, with half of the fine going to the prosecutor and costs of $19,302.90.
In a criminal case, the court allowed evidence about money laundering processes to be admitted in court. This evidence helps prove that it is reasonable to suspect that the money involved is from illegal activities.
The NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal awarded statutory compensation to the claimant for a psychological injury resulting from an act of violence. The Tribunal found that the injury was disabling and thus entitled to compensation under the Victims Support and Rehabilitation Act 1996.