Guideline judgments such as R v Henry for armed robbery must not be applied to different offences such as demanding with menaces, even as a 'litmus paper'. Evidence of circumstances capable of elevating the offence to a more serious charge (here, that money was actually taken, elevating demand with menaces to robbery) should not be introduced into sentencing proceedings. However, the identification of such errors in the sentencing process does not of itself require appellate intervention; the Court must form a positive opinion that some other sentence was warranted in law.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.