Doig v The King

In the case of Doig v The King, the appellant, Doig, was convicted of procuring a child to engage in sexual activity outside Australia and of another offence involving the persistent sexual abuse of a child outside Australia. Doig appealed against the sentence imposed by the sentencing judge, arguing that it was manifestly excessive and that the starting point for the indicative sentence for one offence was disproportionately high, inflating the aggregate sentence ultimately imposed. The High Court of Australia granted leave to appeal and subsequently allowed the appeal. Doig was re-sentenced.

The central legal issues the court had to address were whether the sentencing judge had erred in imposing a manifestly excessive aggregate sentence and whether the starting point for the indicative sentence for one offence was disproportionately high, inflating the aggregate sentence ultimately imposed. The court needed to determine whether the sentence was within the range of what was appropriate and whether the starting point was appropriate in the circumstances.

The court found that the sentencing judge had indeed erred in imposing a manifestly excessive aggregate sentence. The court considered that the starting point for the indicative sentence for one offence was disproportionately high, which inflated the aggregate sentence ultimately imposed. The court determined that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive and that the starting point for the indicative sentence for one offence was disproportionately high. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and Doig was re-sentenced.