A sentencing judge may properly take into account the collateral consequence of disqualification from directing or managing a company under s 229 of the Corporations Law both in determining the notional head sentence under s 21E(1) and in exercising the discretion under s 19B(1), because these are materially different tasks. The fact that the same factor is considered at both stages does not, without more, constitute the giving of undue weight to that factor. A discharge without conviction under s 19B(1) may be appropriate even for serious fraud offences where the offender's culpability is at a low level and strong mitigating factors are present.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 3 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.