The characterisation of a statutory provision governing victim impact statements (s 8Q(2) of the Sentencing Act 1991) as 'mandatory' does not resolve the question of whether non-compliance vitiates the sentencing discretion; the consequences of non-compliance must be assessed by reference to the Project Blue Sky framework. A sentencing judge's failure to ensure only relevant and admissible material is read aloud in victim impact statements may ground leave to appeal even where the sentencing reasons do not indicate reliance on irrelevant material.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.