Gillard v The Queen

In *Gillard v The Queen*, the appellant, Michael Alan Gillard, appealed against sentences imposed by the primary judge following his conviction for various sexual offences. The appeal was heard by Refshauge ACJ, Penfold and North JJ.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive, whether the primary judge erred in accumulating the sentences, and whether the cumulative effect of the sentences amounted to a "crushing" sentence that constituted an error. The Court also considered the impact of delay on the appellant's parole eligibility and the principles governing re-sentencing following a successful appeal against conviction.

The Court of Appeal upheld the appeal, finding that the original sentencing had involved an error. While confirming the convictions for the offences, the Court set aside the original sentences. In re-sentencing, the Court applied principles of restraint, particularly in the context of a successful appeal against conviction, and considered the appropriate discount for a plea of guilty. The Court also took into account the impact of the delay in the finalisation of proceedings on the appellant's eligibility for parole. The Court of Appeal re-sentenced the appellant, imposing a series of determinate sentences for the offences, with specific commencement dates, and set a non-parole period.