A sentencing judge's references to matters of general knowledge (such as the cost to revenue of illegal tobacco and health risks of tobacco) do not constitute a denial of procedural fairness where they add only 'colour' to otherwise correct and uncontestable reasoning about general deterrence. In parity assessments, a co-offender's significantly worse criminal history can justify the same sentence despite a lower quantum of offending. The definition of 'loss' in s 130.1 of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth), which includes 'not getting what one might get', means that illegal tobacco operations properly constitute defrauding the revenue even where no actual excise has yet become payable.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 3 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.