DPP v Sidaoui - [2019] VSC 225

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S CR 2018 0220

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

HISAM MAHMOUD SIDAOUI

---

JUDGE:	HOLLINGWORTH J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	12, 13 December 2018
DATE OF SENTENCE:	26 April 2019
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Sidaoui
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2019] VSC 225

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Obtaining financial advantage by deception (18 charges) – Theft (15 charges) – Continuing criminal enterprise charges – Course of conduct charges – Offending by lawyer over 10 year period – Breach of trust – Early plea of guilty – Genuine remorse – Verdins considerations – Ill health – Undue delay – Importance of general deterrence, just punishment and denunciation – Sentenced to total effective sentence of 10 years and 1 month’s imprisonment with non-parole period of 5 years and 6 months.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the DPP	Mr R Gibson SC and Ms S Clancy	Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
For Mr Sidaoui	Mr P Dunn QC and Ms V Drago	Galbally Rolfe

HER HONOUR:

Hisam Mahmoud Sidaoui, you have pleaded guilty to 18 charges of obtaining a financial advantage by deception, and 15 charges of theft. You committed these offences over a period of ten years, between October 2003 and November 2013, whilst you were a practising lawyer.

You were born in Australia in 1961, and are one of four children of Lebanese immigrant parents. Your early family life was happy, and your early schooling was unremarkable. You moved to Lebanon with your family for your first few years of high school. Whilst in Lebanon, civil war broke out, and your family lived in difficult circumstances. Your family returned to Australia to avoid the ongoing conflict, and you finished your secondary schooling here. You obtained a degree in applied science, and then a law degree in 1990.

You were admitted to practise as a lawyer in 1991. After completing your articles of clerkship with another practitioner, you began your own firm in Coburg. You practised as a sole practitioner until 2013, doing work which included conveyancing, preparing leases and wills, and some family law matters. Most of your clients came from the Arabic speaking community.

You borrowed money from various financial institutions and private lenders, using as security certificates of title which your firm held for family members and unrelated clients. In order to obtain those loans, you forged signatures and provided false information on numerous documents, including loan applications, mortgages, sale agreements and transfers of land. All of this was done without the knowledge or authority of the relevant clients or relatives. This conduct constitutes the basis of the 18 charges of obtaining a financial advantage by deception (‘the deception charges’).

You also stole funds that had been deposited into your trust account. Some of those funds were the proceeds from the sale of client properties, others were deposits related to property purchases. This conduct constitutes the basis of the 15 theft charges.

The…

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 v Sidaoui

Details

AGLC: Director of Public Prosecutions v Sidaoui [2019] VSC 225
Case: [2019] VSC 225
Decision Date: 26 April 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of DPP v Sidaoui was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria, where the defendant, a lawyer, faced numerous charges stemming from fraudulent activities over a decade. The defendant pleaded guilty to 18 charges of obtaining financial advantage by deception, 15 charges of theft, two continuing criminal enterprise charges, and one course of conduct charge. The nature of the dispute centred around the defendant's misuse of client funds and breach of professional trust, with the prosecution arguing for a stringent penalty to address the gravity of the crimes and the defendant's professional misconduct.

The legal issues the court had to decide included the appropriate sentence for the defendant's extensive criminal conduct, taking into account the Verdins considerations such as the breach of trust, the defendant's early plea of guilty, genuine remorse, the defendant's ill health, and the undue delay in bringing the matter to court. The court was also tasked with balancing the importance of general deterrence, just punishment, and denunciation against the mitigating factors presented.

The court found that despite the mitigating factors, the crimes were severe and warranted a significant punishment. The court acknowledged the defendant's early guilty plea and genuine remorse but emphasised the need for general deterrence and denunciation. It also considered the undue delay and the defendant's ill health, which influenced the final sentence. Ultimately, the court sentenced the defendant to a total effective sentence of 10 years and 1 month’s imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 5 years and 6 months. This sentence reflected the court's consideration of all relevant factors while addressing the seriousness of the crimes committed.

Orders