Where co-offenders are sentenced by the same judge for the same offence, inconsistent assessments of objective seriousness and substantially different starting points that are not justified by differences in role, prior record, or subjective circumstances will constitute unjustifiable disparity warranting appellate intervention. The difference between additional offences being taken into account and the objective seriousness of the index offence must be maintained — the former should be addressed through totality, not by inflating the indicative sentence for the index offence. There is no rule of practice requiring the NSWCCA to address all grounds of appeal when a parity ground is clearly made out.
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.