The case reaffirms that sentencing for multiple armed robbery offences requires individual assessment of each offence's objective seriousness before considering totality (Pearce), that Form 1 offences must be given tangible effect in the sentence for the principal offence, and that drug addiction — even where it commenced at a very young age — cannot be the primary consideration around which sentences are formulated at the expense of general and specific deterrence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.