A sentencing judge's reference to the strength of the Crown case, when made in context of assessing remorse rather than utilitarian value, does not constitute error under Phillips v The Queen. The parity principle does not require mathematical proportionality between co-offenders, and significant differences in role, quantity trafficked, and personal circumstances (including drug addiction and mental illness) may justify substantial differences in sentence. Co-offender sentences regarded as particularly lenient remain relevant but do not require or justify an inadequate sentence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 49 later cases that cite this judgment.
7 of the 49 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.