A sentencing judge is entitled to make an evaluative judgment about the degree of environmental harm caused by an offence without requiring expert evidence to identical effect. The question of whether the correct test for appellate review of sentencing findings of fact is whether the finding was 'open' or whether the judge made a 'mistake' remains unresolved and may require a five-judge bench. The principle in R v Oinonen (that a full guilty plea discount should be given where loss of utilitarian benefit is not the offender's fault) is inapposite where the offender did not enjoy substantial success on the disputed factual matters.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 16 later cases that cite this judgment.
5 of the 16 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.