Legal Research
Cases
DPP (Cth) v Northcote

DPP (Cth) v Northcote

Case [2014] NSWCCA 26 14 March 2014

Type to search within this case.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Northcote [2014] NSWCCA 26
Hearing dates: 20/02/2014
Decision date: 14 March 2014
Before: Hoeben CJ at CL at [1]
Garling J at [2]
R S Hulme AJ at [130]
Decision:
(1) Appeal allowed.
(2) Quash the sentences with respect to each offence imposed in the District Court of NSW (Jeffreys DCJ) on 17 September 2013.
(3) In lieu thereof impose the following sentences:
(a) On the offence of "Use Position as a Director Dishonestly" contrary to s 184(2) Corporations Act 2001, (Cth) the respondent Mr Bryan Northcote is sentenced to a term of imprisonment for a period of 3 years and 6 months commencing on 27 September 2013 and expiring on 26 March 2017.
(b) On the first offence of "Making a False and Misleading Statement in a Document lodged with ASIC", contrary to s 1308(2) Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), the respondent Mr Bryan Northcote is sentenced to a term of imprisonment for a period of 1 year commencing on 27 September 2013 and expiring on 26 September 2014.
(c) On the second offence of "Making a False and Misleading Statement in a Document lodged with ASIC", contrary to s 1308(2) Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), the respondent Mr Bryan Northcote is sentenced to a term of imprisonment for a period of 1 year commencing on 27 September 2013 and expiring on 26 September 2014.
(4) The Court directs that the respondent be released on 26 September 2015, being the expiration of 2 years of the sentence with respect to the offence contrary to s 184(2) of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), upon a recognisance that he be of good behaviour during the balance of the term of that sentence and upon him giving security in the sum of $1,000 without surety.

Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - appeal - Crown appeal against sentence - offence of using position as executive and managing director of company dishonestly, with intention of directly or indirectly gaining an advantage contrary to s184(2) Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) - two offences of making false and misleading statement in a document filed with the Australian Securities Investment Commission contrary to s 1308(2) Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) - guilty plea - total sentence of two years imprisonment to be served by way of intensive correction in the community - whether sentencing judge erred in assessing the objective seriousness of the offences by failing to adequately take into account material considerations - whether sentence manifestly inadequate - importance of general deterrence
Legislation Cited: Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)
Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
Criminal Appeal Act 1912
Cases Cited: Director of Public Prosecutions v Bulfin [1998] 4 VR 114
Green v The Queen; Quinn v The Queen [2011] HCA 49; (2011) 244 CLR 462
Kwok v R [2007] NSWCCA 281; (2007) 64 ACSR 307
Mulato v R [2006] NSWCCA 282

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading DPP (Cth) v Northcote

Details

AGLC: Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Northcote [2014] NSWCCA 26
Case: [2014] NSWCCA 26
Decision Date: 14 March 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Director of Public Prosecutions (Commonwealth) v Northcote, the Director of Public Prosecutions appealed against the sentence imposed by the sentencing judge on Northcote, who had pleaded guilty to multiple charges under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). Northcote, the executive and managing director of a company, was found guilty of using his position dishonestly with the intention of gaining an advantage, as well as making false and misleading statements in documents filed with the Australian Securities Investment Commission. The sentencing judge imposed a total sentence of two years imprisonment, to be served by way of intensive correction in the community. The central legal issue before the court was whether the sentencing judge had erred in assessing the objective seriousness of the offences by failing to adequately consider material considerations, and if the sentence was manifestly inadequate. The court also considered the importance of general deterrence in sentencing.

The court found that the sentencing judge had not adequately considered the gravity of the offences, which involved significant dishonesty and deception in a corporate setting, impacting the company and its stakeholders. The court noted that the offences were serious and had a substantial impact on the community, given Northcote's position of trust and responsibility. The court emphasised the importance of general deterrence in sentencing, stating that the sentence should reflect the seriousness of the offences and serve to deter others from engaging in similar conduct. The court concluded that the sentence was manifestly inadequate, taking into account the objective seriousness of the offences, the need for general deterrence, and the personal circumstances of Northcote.

As a result, the court allowed the appeal, quashed the original sentence, and ordered that Northcote be re-sentenced. The court provided specific guidance for the re-sentencing, directing the sentencing judge to consider the seriousness of the offences, the need for general deterrence, and Northcote's personal circumstances, among other relevant factors. The court emphasised that the re-sentencing should reflect the gravity of the offences and serve to deter others from engaging in similar conduct.

Orders