The parity principle requires a sentencing judge to positively analyse and define the role of each co-offender in the criminal enterprise before undertaking the comparison; a negative characterisation (stating what the offender was not) is insufficient. The parity comparison does not involve any question of onus or standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt. Where the roles of co-offenders are significantly different in both objective involvement and subjective circumstances, the parity principle does not compel the imposition of the same or similar sentence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 7 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.