The Court upheld an 8-month immediate imprisonment sentence for unlawful wounding by glassing, holding that the sentence was within the discretionary range and that the magistrate was entitled to decline suspension given the deliberate use of a glass as a weapon, the pre-existing animosity motivating the attack, and the weight properly given to general deterrence. The Court confirmed that while glassing offences do not invariably require immediate imprisonment (following [name withheld] v [name withheld]), it was open to the magistrate on the facts to conclude that suspension was inappropriate, and that provocation (in the mitigating sense) was considered but properly given limited weight.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.