Kader v Director of Public Prosecutions

Kader appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against his sentence for perjury and perverting the course of justice. The appellant had pleaded guilty to these offences, which arose from his conduct during two previous trials for sexual offences where the juries had been unable to reach a verdict. In the first trial, the appellant gave false evidence, and he subsequently attempted to persuade his former wife to corroborate this false evidence.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the primary judge erred in applying the principle established in *De Simoni* by treating the appellant's intention to secure an acquittal as an aggravating factor during sentencing. Additionally, the Court considered the admissibility of a victim impact statement from the complainant in the original sexual offence proceedings, specifically whether that complainant could be considered a victim of the perjury offence. The Court also had to assess whether ongoing Family Court proceedings posed a risk of re-offending by the appellant.

The Court of Appeal found that the primary judge had indeed breached the *De Simoni* principle by taking the appellant's intention to secure an acquittal into account as an aggravating circumstance. However, despite this breach, the Court determined that no lesser sentence was appropriate. The appeal was therefore dismissed.