David Muir v The Queen

The appeal before the Court of Appeal of the Australian Capital Territory concerned David Muir and the Crown. Muir appealed against a sentence imposed by a judge of the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the sentencing judge had properly taken into account section 16G of the *Crimes Act 1914* (Cth) when determining the sentence. This section relates to the calculation of remissions and reductions in sentence. The appellant bore the onus of establishing that there was an error in the sentencing process.

The Court of Appeal, comprising Higgins CJ, Crispin P, and Madgwick J, dismissed the appeal. Higgins CJ was satisfied that section 16G was given effect to, or at least taken into account, in fixing the sentence, and found no manifest error. Crispin P agreed with Higgins CJ and added nothing further. Madgwick J went further, finding it impossible to conclude that a proper application of section 16G to the serious white-collar crimes committed would yield a result other than the sentence imposed, which included a non-parole period of three years and six months and total head sentences of seven and a half years.