Mason v The King

Mason appealed against a sentence imposed by a sentencing judge. The appeal concerned whether the sentence was manifestly excessive, particularly in light of marked differences between the appellant's sentence and those imposed in comparable cases.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the sentence imposed on the appellant was so disproportionate to the gravity of the offence or the circumstances of the offender as to be demonstrably unjust or unreasonable. This required the Court to consider the principles of sentencing and to compare the sentence with those imposed in similar cases.

The Court of Appeal found that the sentences imposed were plainly excessive. Applying the principles of sentencing and having regard to comparative cases, the Court concluded that the sentence was manifestly excessive. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and it was unnecessary to consider the other grounds of appeal. Leave to appeal on those other grounds was refused.