Lovegrove v The Queen

The appeal in *Lovegrove v The Queen* concerned the interpretation of section 63(5) of the *Sentencing Act* (NT) and its application to time spent on bail. The appellant, Lovegrove, sought to have his sentence backdated to include the period he was on bail with electronic monitoring. The case was heard by Grant CJ, Blokland J, and Mildren AJ.

The central legal issue before the court was whether section 63(5) of the *Sentencing Act* (NT) permitted a court to backdate a sentence to take into account time spent on bail, specifically in circumstances where the bail involved electronic monitoring as contemplated by section 5(2)(k) of the Act. This required the court to determine whether "custody" within the meaning of section 63(5) encompassed being on bail under electronic monitoring.

The court reasoned that for section 63(5) to apply, three conditions must be met: the offender must have been in custody in relation to an arrest for an offence, convicted of that offence, and sentenced to imprisonment for that offence. The court held that bail on electronic monitoring does not equate to "custody" for the purposes of section 63(5). However, the court clarified that the discretionary power to backdate a sentence under section 63(5) is not confined to the period of actual custody but can extend to any date from the time of arrest. Crucially, the court found that this discretion must be exercised judicially and that the court *does* have the discretion to backdate a sentence to take into account time spent on bail in the circumstances contemplated by section 5(2)(k). Despite this, the court concluded that no substantial miscarriage of justice had occurred and that no lesser sentence was warranted.

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.