A sentencing judge's refusal to accept a submission in mitigation does not ordinarily lead to an increase in sentence; however, in rare cases, a rejected mitigation submission may itself demonstrate an aggravating feature, provided the judge identifies it and explains its significance. The case also illustrates the application of parity principles where co-offenders have markedly different personal circumstances but comparable levels of criminality, with the dissent highlighting that all components of a sentence (head sentence and time to be served) must be considered in the parity comparison.
The full text is available to signed-in members.