Tuhi v R

[2025] NSWCCA 115

NSW Court of Criminal Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Manifest excess
5. › Aggregate sentence
6. › Whether aggregate sentence unreasonable or plainly unjust
7. › Whether error in indicative sentence necessarily establishes error in aggregate sentence
8. › Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61, 86(1)(b)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Assessment of subjective case
5. › Whether sentencing judge erred in finding of no remorse
6. › Whether insufficient weight given to rehabilitation evidence
7. › Whether post-sentence evidence admissible on appeal
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Aggregate sentencing
4. › Indicative sentences
5. › Totality principle
6. › Concurrence and accumulation
7. › Domestic violence offences

Quick Take

An indicative sentence that is excessive relative to the assessed objective seriousness of an offence does not necessarily render the aggregate sentence manifestly excessive, particularly where the aggregate sentence properly reflects the overall criminality when assessed against the totality principle.

Case Details

Citation[2025] NSWCCA 115

CourtNSWCCA

JurisdictionNew South Wales

Unlock so much more with Barrister AI

The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.

Cited by4

2026Periasamy v RNSWCCA 89
2026Saleh v RNSWCCA 42
2026Hyde v RNSWCCA 1
2025Nair v RNSWCCA 136

Relies on17

2024Aa v RNSWCCA 132
2021Ahmad v RNSWCCA 30
2020Kliendienst v RNSWCCA 98
2019Australian Health & Nutrition Association Ltd v Hive Marketing Group Pty LtdNSWCA 61
and 13 more after sign-in

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in