District Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v Aiga [2023] NSWDC 622 Hearing dates: 26-27 October 2023 Date of orders: 27 October 2023 Decision date: 27 October 2023 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Neilson DCJ Decision: See par [40].
Catchwords: CRIME – SENTENCE – Causing grievous bodily harm – Being reckless as to causing actual bodily harm – Crimes Act 1900 s 35(2) and common assault – Glassing of a bar worker by a patron at a tavern – Offender was drunk – Long criminal history of alcohol related offences – Female victim left with a 6cm scar on left side of face.
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Cases Cited: Callaghan v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 58
Filippou v The Queen [2015] 256 CLR 47
Texts Cited: Nil.
Category: Sentence Parties: Rex – Crown
Accused – Mr Filo AigaRepresentation: Counsel:
Solicitors:
Rex – Mr Bell.
Accused – Ms Cotton.
Plaintiff – Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)
Accused – Walsh & Blair Solicitors
File Number(s): 2022/00162082 Publication restriction: Nil.
Judgment
-
HIS HONOUR: Filo Aiga stands for sentence as a consequence of pleading guilty to two charges. The first is a charge that on 4 June 2022, at Kogarah in this State, he did assault Aghil Sobi. That is an offence contrary to s 61 of the Crimes Act 1900 and carries a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment. The offence is commonly known as common assault. The more serious crime to which he pleaded guilty was that on 4 June 2022, at Kogarah in this State, he did cause grievous bodily harm to Kyree Bathurst and was reckless as to causing actual bodily harm to Kyree Bathurst. That is an offence contrary to s 35(2) of the Crimes Act 1900. The maximum penalty prescribed by Parliament for that offence is imprisonment for ten years. Parliament has fixed a standard non-parole period of four years for a case in which the offence was in the mid-range of objective seriousness and where there was a finding of guilt returned after a trial. It is not strictly applicable to a person who pleads guilty.
-
The facts are troubling. At the time of the offence, the offender was 28 years old. By the middle of 2022, he was in an intimate relationship with a lady known as Samantha Buckland. Ms Buckland was employed at the Kogarah Tavern at Kogarah as a manager. The victims, Kyree Bathurst and Aghil Sobi, also worked from time to time at the tavern. On 3 June 2022, Ms Buckland worked at the tavern from 8am until 5pm. After she completed her shift, she stayed at the tavern with the offender who had attended there, and they consumed a number of alcoholic beverages together. Ms Bathurst commenced working at the tavern as a barmaid at 7pm. Her shift was to end at 3am in the morning of 4 June 2022.
-
About 7.30pm or 8pm, Ms Buckland and the offender left the tavern…
Continue reading R v Aiga
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Aiga [2023] NSWDC 622
- Case
- [2023] NSWDC 622
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the court were the appropriate level of penalty for the defendant's actions and whether there were any mitigating or aggravating factors that should be considered. The court had to determine the appropriate sentence for the grievous bodily harm charge, as well as the sentences for the other two charges. In addition, the court had to consider the defendant's criminal history and the impact of his alcohol dependency on his actions.
The court found that the defendant's actions were reckless and that his criminal history, including a pattern of alcohol-related offending, was an aggravating factor. The court also took into account the significant impact the assault had on the victim, who was left with a permanent scar. However, the court recognised the defendant's alcohol dependency and his participation in rehabilitation programs as mitigating factors. After weighing all the factors, the court determined that the appropriate sentence was a term of imprisonment, with specific details outlined in the final orders.
The final orders of the court included a sentence of imprisonment for the charge of causing grievous bodily harm, with a non-parole period and a total sentence length specified. The sentences for the other two charges were to run concurrently with the main sentence. The court also made orders for the defendant's rehabilitation and supervision upon release from prison.
Orders
Orders of the court
See par [40].
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.