A sentencing judge's failure to make any express reference to remorse in sentencing remarks, where remorse was supported by unchallenged evidence from multiple third-party sources and was accepted by the Crown as a mitigating factor, constitutes a House v The King error requiring resentence. However, the weight to be given to mitigating factors such as youth, dysfunctional background, delay, and prospects of rehabilitation remains a matter for the sentencing discretion and will not be disturbed absent demonstrated error.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.