Baf v The Queen

The applicant, Baf, appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeal against his conviction and sentence for sexual offences. The appeal concerned the adequacy of the trial judge's reasons for conviction and the severity of the sentence imposed.

The Court was required to determine whether the trial judge's reasons for finding the applicant guilty were inadequate, and whether the head sentence of nine years imprisonment and the non-parole period of six years were manifestly excessive, given the nature of the offending.

In its reasoning, the Court emphasised that the trial judge's reasons must be considered as a whole, in light of the conduct of the hearing and the evidence presented, including the victim's testimony and admissions made by the applicant. The Court found that the judge's reasons were not inadequate and that the findings of guilt were adequately supported by the evidence. Regarding the sentence, the Court noted the significant and sustained nature of the offending, which involved a gross breach of trust and caused long-term harm to the complainant. Consequently, the Court concluded that the starting point of ten years imprisonment was not manifestly excessive, nor were the head sentence and non-parole period.

The Court granted permission to appeal on the ground concerning the adequacy of the reasons but dismissed the appeal on that ground. Permission to appeal on other grounds was refused.