L v WA

(2007) 176 A Crim R 135; [2007] WASCA 186

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Sexual offences against children
4. › Indecent dealing with children under 13
5. › No physical touching of victims by offender
6. › Whether individual sentences manifestly excessive
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Totality principle
4. › Multiple victims
5. › Whether totality principle has limited effect where victims aware of offending against each other
6. › Whether 'multiple victims principle' exists
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Suspension of sentence
4. › Sexual offences against children
5. › Whether sentencing judge erred in declining to suspend sentence
6. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Appellate review
4. › Whether effective sentence manifestly excessive
5. › Restructuring of cumulative and concurrent sentences

Quick Take

There is no 'multiple victims principle' in sentencing that limits the operation of the totality principle where each victim is aware of offending against the other. The totality principle applies with full force in all cases, requiring the aggregate sentence to fairly and justly reflect the total criminality of the offender's conduct. The observations of Ipp J in De Luce v The Queen suggesting that totality may have only a marginal effect in multiple victim cases should not be followed. Suspension of sentence for child sexual offences does not invariably require 'exceptional circumstances'; it is sufficient that the facts of a particular case may justify suspension.