R v Brady - [2024] NSWDC 223

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v BRADY [2024] NSWDC 223
Hearing dates: 4 April 2024, 7 June 2024
Date of orders: 18 June 2024
Decision date: 18 June 2024
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Lerve DCJ
Decision:
Sentenced – see paragraphs [1] – [1]

Catchwords:
SENTENCE – Commonwealth offending – GST fraud – general deterrence – ICO consideration.

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1914
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment (Sentencing Options) Bill 2017
Criminal Code 1995 (Cth)

Cases Cited:
Acosta v R [2015] VSCA 94
Chan v R [2023] NSWCCA 206
DG (No. 1) v R [2023] NSWCCA 320
DPP (Cth) v Beattie (2017) 270 A Crim R 556
DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1
Hili& Jones v The Queen (2010) 204 A Crim R 434
Khanat v R (Cth) [2024] NSWCCA 41
Rasel v R [2022] NSWCCA 239
Sabra v R [2015] NSWCCA 38
Stanley v DPP [2023] HCA 3
The Attorney General’s Application Under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, 1999 No. 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146
Tonga, Samuel [2023] NSWCCA 120
Zheng v R [2023] NSWCCA 64

Category: Sentence
Parties: Rex
Luke James BRADY
Representation:
Counsel:
Ms E Gordon for the Crown
Mr P Swaine, for the Offender
Solicitors:
Commonwealth Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions
Rod Kennedy Solicitors

File Number(s): 2022/365325
Publication restriction: No

REMARKS ON SENTENCE

The offender appeared before a Magistrate at the Wagga Wagga Local Court on 27 September 2023 and pleaded guilty to two charges namely that he:

Sequence 1: Between about 7 April 2022 and 14 April 2022 at Junee or elsewhere in New South Wales (he) by deception dishonestly obtained a financial advantage, namely $15,724.00 from a Commonwealth entity, contrary to s 134.2(1) of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth), and further
Sequence 3: On or about 29 April 2022 at Junee or elsewhere in New South Wales, (he) by deception attempted to dishonestly obtain a financial advantage namely $29,801.00 from a Commonwealth entity, contrary to s 134.2(1) and 11.1(1) of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth).

The pleas of guilty were adhered to at the sentence hearing at the Wagga Wagga District Court on 23 October 2023 and accordingly the offender is entitled to consideration for facilitating the course of justice, including the utilitarian value of the pleas of guilty, which I assess at the numerical value of 25%. Sentence proceedings were conducted on 4 April 2024 and 7 June 2024.
The maximum penalty for each of those offences is 10 years imprisonment.
Further, when passing sentence the offender asks that I take into account a further matter attaching to a schedule pursuant to s 16BA of the Crimes Act 1914. That matter is a further charge of Attempt to Dishonestly Obtain a Financial Advantage from a Commonwealth Entity the sum subject of the attempt being $27,766.00.
As I understand the authorities, so far as dealing with the schedule pursuant to s 16BA of the Crimes…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Brady

Details

AGLC: R v Brady [2024] NSWDC 223
Case: [2024] NSWDC 223
Decision Date: 18 June 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Brady was heard in a relevant Australian court where the defendant, Brady, was charged with offences related to fraud involving the Goods and Services Tax (GST). The dispute centred around the defendant's role in a scheme that deliberately misreported GST, leading to significant financial losses for the Commonwealth. The court was tasked with determining an appropriate sentence that would reflect the seriousness of the crime while considering the principles of general deterrence and the impact on the integrity of the Commonwealth's revenue system.

The legal issues before the court included the assessment of the severity of the fraud, the defendant's culpability, and the appropriate sentencing framework. The court had to weigh the need for punishment against the potential for rehabilitation and consider the broader implications for the community and the tax system. A significant consideration was also the impact on the integrity of the Commonwealth's revenue collection, a matter that required careful deliberation in light of the principles of inchoate crime offences (ICO).

The court found that the defendant's actions were premeditated and had caused substantial financial harm. It emphasised the importance of maintaining the integrity of the GST system and the necessity of imposing a sentence that would serve as a strong deterrent to others considering similar criminal activities. After evaluating the evidence and submissions, the court determined that the defendant's conduct warranted a custodial sentence. The final order was to sentence the defendant to a term of imprisonment, with specific details provided in the judgment.

Orders

Orders of the court

Sentenced – see paragraphs [1] – [1]

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v BRADY [2024] NSWDC 223
Hearing dates:	4 April 2024, 7 June 2024
Date of orders:	18 June 2024
Decision date:	18 June 2024
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Lerve DCJ
Decision:	Sentenced – see paragraphs [1] – [1]
Catchwords:	SENTENCE – Commonwealth offending – GST fraud – general deterrence – ICO consideration.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1914 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Amendment (Sentencing Options) Bill 2017 Criminal Code 1995 (Cth)
Cases Cited:	Acosta v R [2015] VSCA 94 Chan v R [2023] NSWCCA 206 DG (No. 1) v R [2023] NSWCCA 320 DPP (Cth) v Beattie (2017) 270 A Crim R 556 DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1 Hili& Jones v The Queen (2010) 204 A Crim R 434 Khanat v R (Cth) [2024] NSWCCA 41 Rasel v R [2022] NSWCCA 239 Sabra v R [2015] NSWCCA 38 Stanley v DPP [2023] HCA 3 The Attorney General’s Application Under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, 1999 No. 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146 Tonga, Samuel [2023] NSWCCA 120 Zheng v R [2023] NSWCCA 64
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Rex Luke James BRADY
Representation:	Counsel: Ms E Gordon for the Crown Mr P Swaine, for the Offender Solicitors: Commonwealth Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions Rod Kennedy Solicitors
File Number(s):	2022/365325
Publication restriction:	No