A sentencing judge's failure to refer to or apply an applicable guideline judgment constitutes a serious error of principle warranting interference on a Crown appeal, absent the exercise of discretion in favour of the respondent. However, the discretion not to intervene may be exercised where the respondent would be required to return to custody, has demonstrated genuine rehabilitation, provided substantial assistance to authorities, and played a limited role in the offence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 11 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 11 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.