R v Huntman - [2007] NSWDC 193

CITATION: R v Huntman [2007] NSWDC 193

HEARING DATE(S): 6 September 2007

JUDGMENT DATE:
12 September 2007

JURISDICTION: Criminal

JUDGMENT OF: Goldring DCJ

DECISION: Sentenced to imprisonment ; see Paragraph [76]; Make reparation orders ; see Paragraph [77]

CATCHWORDS: Criminal law - sentence - social security fraud - multiple offences

LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)

CASES CITED: R v Purdon (unreported) CCA 27/3/97
R v Townsend (2007) NSW CCA 215
R v Keir (2004) NSW CCA 106
R v JRB (2006) NSW CCA 371
Sopher (1993) 70 ACrimR 570
Kovacevic v Mills (2000) SASC 106
Cameron v Simounds (1993) 171 LSJS 305
Cruz v Treminio (2001) ACTSC 59
Ralph v Nawrojee (2003) WASCA 5
R v Brewer (2004) ACTCA 10

PARTIES: Crown
Wilhelmina Huntman

FILE NUMBER(S): 07/41/0125

COUNSEL: Ms S Baker-Goldsmith (Crown)
Mr B Collaery (Offender)

SOLICITORS: Commonwealth DPP (Crown)
Gordon Naylor & Associates, Queanbeyan (Offender)

JUDGMENT

SENTENCE

1 HIS HONOUR: Wilhelmina Vogt, who was charged under the name of Wilhelmina Huntman, pleaded guilty in the Local Court to two charges of defrauding the Commonwealth, and two charges of obtaining financial advantage by deception. She adhered to her pleas in this court and, accordingly, she is convicted of those four offences. The maximum penalty for each offence is ten years imprisonment and a substantial fine.

2 The agreed facts are as follows. The offender, whilst receiving social security payments under the name, Huntman, also received payments under the names of Vogt and Venda Mona Danushka Vegtelaar. Vogt was not a false name and it was, in fact, the name by which she was known at the time, but that was not something she disclosed to social security. She maintained falsely named bank accounts, and she used false documents of identity in perpetrating the fraud, and as a result she was overpaid a total sum of $372,619.30. The social security payments have been administered by an agency with different names but I will refer to it as Centrelink.

3 The offender was born in the Netherlands on 12 April 1934, and came to Australia in April 1958 on a Netherlands passport. In August 1958 she married Gerardes Johannes Huntman in Canberra and they separated in 1986. In April 1983, she opened a passbook account with the Commonwealth Bank in the name of Wilhelmina Huntman. In May 2001, she opened a statement account with the same bank, also in the name of Wilhelmina Huntman.

4 At various times she had bank accounts with Westpac Bank in the name of Wilhelmina Vogt, and those were three different accounts. In November 1992, she opened an account in the name of Venda Mona Vegtelaar with the State Bank in Belconnen. This bank was taken over by the Commonwealth Bank and she maintained an account with a different number.

5 In December 1983 she enrolled with Medicare and obtained a Medicare name in the name of Wilhelmina Huntman. In 1987, she obtained a Medicare card in the name of Wilhelmina Vogt. On 1 February 1993,…

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 Huntman

Details

AGLC: R v Huntman [2007] NSWDC 193
Case: [2007] NSWDC 193
Decision Date: 12 September 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Huntman, was convicted of various counts of social security fraud. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The primary issue before the court was the appropriate sentence to be imposed for the appellant's crimes. The court had to consider the seriousness of the offences, the appellant's history, and the principles of sentencing for fraud.

The court addressed the appellant's criminal history, which included prior convictions for fraud, as well as the aggravating factors of the current offences, which involved substantial sums and a high degree of planning. The court also considered the mitigating factors, such as the appellant's cooperation with authorities and his expressions of remorse. The court held that the offences warranted a custodial sentence, given their seriousness and the appellant's history of similar offending. The court also emphasised the need for deterrence and denunciation, given the impact of social security fraud on the community.

The court sentenced the appellant to a term of imprisonment, with specific details provided in paragraph [76]. Additionally, the court made reparation orders, requiring the appellant to repay the amounts defrauded, as detailed in paragraph [77]. The sentence reflects the court's consideration of the seriousness of the offences, the appellant's history, and the need to uphold the principles of justice in cases of social security fraud.

Orders

Orders of the court

Sentenced to imprisonment ; see Paragraph [76]; Make reparation orders ; see Paragraph [77]

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.

CITATION:	R v Huntman [2007] NSWDC 193
HEARING DATE(S):	6 September 2007
JUDGMENT DATE:	12 September 2007
JURISDICTION:	Criminal
JUDGMENT OF:	Goldring DCJ
DECISION:	Sentenced to imprisonment ; see Paragraph [76]; Make reparation orders ; see Paragraph [77]
CATCHWORDS:	Criminal law - sentence - social security fraud - multiple offences
LEGISLATION CITED:	Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
CASES CITED:	R v Purdon (unreported) CCA 27/3/97 R v Townsend (2007) NSW CCA 215 R v Keir (2004) NSW CCA 106 R v JRB (2006) NSW CCA 371 Sopher (1993) 70 ACrimR 570 Kovacevic v Mills (2000) SASC 106 Cameron v Simounds (1993) 171 LSJS 305 Cruz v Treminio (2001) ACTSC 59 Ralph v Nawrojee (2003) WASCA 5 R v Brewer (2004) ACTCA 10
PARTIES:	Crown Wilhelmina Huntman
FILE NUMBER(S):	07/41/0125
COUNSEL:	Ms S Baker-Goldsmith (Crown) Mr B Collaery (Offender)
SOLICITORS:	Commonwealth DPP (Crown) Gordon Naylor & Associates, Queanbeyan (Offender)