Hurt v The Queen

Hurt appealed against a sentence imposed by a sentencing judge in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The appeal concerned the application of a Commonwealth mandatory minimum sentencing regime to offences involving child abuse material.

The appeal raised two primary legal issues. First, whether the sentencing judge erred in applying the approach established in *R v Bahar* to the mandatory minimum sentencing regime. Second, whether the sentencing judge erred in considering the timing of the "relevant conduct" for the purposes of a transitional regime applicable to the offences.

The Full Court of the Supreme Court of Queensland found that the sentencing judge did not err in applying the *Bahar* approach. However, the Court upheld the second ground of appeal, concluding that the sentencing judge had erred in their consideration of when the relevant conduct occurred for the purposes of the transitional regime. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the original sentence, and resentenced the offender.