Unattributed copying of a party's submissions in judicial reasons does not vitiate a judgment if the reasons, read as a whole, demonstrate independent and impartial consideration of the evidence and issues. The vice is not plagiarism but the inference that the judge did not independently decide the case. For sentencing under s 56 of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), the gravamen of the offence is the acute and repeated breach of trust rather than the precise number of sexual acts, and calculating exact occasions may be unnecessary where the evidence does not support such precision beyond reasonable doubt. The maximum penalty remains the primary yardstick for assessing sentence, and classifying offences within hypothetical ranges (low, mid, high) is of limited utility, particularly for protean offences such as grooming.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 14 later cases that cite this judgment.
5 of the 14 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.