R v Inia

Case [2019] NSWDC 927 21 June 2019

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Inia [2019] NSWDC 927
Hearing dates: 14 June 2019
Decision date: 21 June 2019
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Norrish QC DCJ
Decision:
Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 2 years 9 months.
At the expiration of 10 months of the sentence, offender to be released upon entering a recognizance of $200 for 3 years and be supervised by Community Corrections.
Offender to make reparation to Commonwealth the sum of $224,246.80

Catchwords:
CRIME – Commonwealth – sentence – obtain financial advantage by deception – fraudulent claims against Medicare - multiple offences over 6 years – pre-meditated planning, deception and fraud – appropriate severity of sentence – consistency in sentencing – special circumstances – some degree of disadvantaged background – committed offences to fund day to day living expenses not a lavish lifestyle – good prospects of rehabilitation – dependency of 3rd parties – incomplete reparation

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
Criminal Code Act1995 (Cth)

Cases Cited:
Bugmy v R (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37
Cameron v R [2017] NSWCCA 229
Carr v R [2003] NSWCCA 175
Dagher v R [2017] NSWCCA 258
DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194
Hili and Jones v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45
Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600; [2013] HCA 38
R v Girard [2004] NSWCCA 170.
R v Hawkins (1989) 45 A Crim R 430
R v Herrera (unreported) NSWCCA 6 June 1997
R v Pipes [2004] NSWCCA 351
Sutherland (unpublished) NSWDC 28 March 2013
Xiao v R (2018) 96 NSWLR 1; [2018] NSWCCA 4

Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Ms Talaiha Inia (offender)
Representation: Counsel:
Mr A Edwards (DPP (Cth))
Ms S Orman-Hales (offender)

File Number(s): 2016/00228869
Publication restriction: No

Judgment

Ms Inia, my practice is to tell people in advance what sentence is to be imposed. In your case, I propose to sentence you to a term of imprisonment of two years and nine months so it represents a 25% discount on the otherwise appropriate sentence, and I propose to a fix a minimum term of ten months. This will mean that you will be eligible to be released on a recognisance to be of good behaviour for three years on 8 March 2020. I will give my reasons now.
The prisoner, Talaiha Inia appears today for sentence in relation to a charge to which she pleaded guilty in the District Court that alleged that between 24 April 2008 and 6 February 2014 at Sydney and elsewhere in the State of New South Wales, she did by deception dishonestly obtain a financial advantage, namely Medicare benefits in the names of Talaiha Inia, Teoura Key, and Sam Inia from another person, namely the Commonwealth, which is a Commonwealth entity.
I would have thought, with the greatest of respect to the drafter of that charge, that the Commonwealth must of necessity…

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 Inia

Details

AGLC: R v Inia [2019] NSWDC 927
Case: [2019] NSWDC 927
Decision Date: 21 June 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Inia, the defendant was convicted of multiple counts of obtaining financial advantage by deception through fraudulent claims against Medicare over a six-year period. The matter was heard and determined in a court of criminal jurisdiction within Australia. The defendant's actions were premeditated, involving significant planning, deception, and fraud. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate severity of the sentence, considering factors such as the nature and extent of the offending, the circumstances of the offender, and the need for consistency in sentencing. The court also needed to assess whether any special circumstances warranted a departure from the standard penalties for such offences.

The legal issues that the court needed to resolve included the appropriate weighting to give to the various factors impacting sentencing, and whether the offender's background, motivations, and prospects for rehabilitation warranted any leniency. The court examined the totality of the offending and the harm caused, as well as the offender's cooperation and attempts at reparation. The court also considered the need for general and specific deterrence in the context of fraudulent behaviour involving public funds.

After careful consideration of the evidence and arguments presented, the court determined that a sentence of imprisonment was necessary to adequately reflect the seriousness of the offending. The court recognised the offender's disadvantaged background and the fact that the offending was committed to fund day-to-day living expenses rather than a lavish lifestyle. However, the court also emphasised the need for accountability and deterrence. The sentence imposed was a term of imprisonment of two years and nine months, with the offender to be released on recognizance after serving 10 months, subject to supervision by Community Corrections. The offender was also ordered to make reparation to the Commonwealth in the sum of $224,246.80.

In summary, the court balanced the various considerations and imposed a sentence that reflected both the need for punishment and the potential for rehabilitation. The court also imposed a reparation order to ensure that the offender makes amends for the financial loss caused by their actions.

Orders

Orders of the court

Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 2 years 9 months.

At the expiration of 10 months of the sentence, offender to be released upon entering a recognizance of $200 for 3 years and be supervised by Community Corrections.

Offender to make reparation to Commonwealth the sum of $224,246.80

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.

Actions

Citations

R v Inia [2019] NSWDC 927

Cases Citing This Decision

No citing cases yet.

Cases Cited

Xiao v R [2019] NSWCCA 4
Citation 1 (Para 41)

…guilty and the facilitation of the course of justice. I need not discuss the relevant decisions. The leading decision in New South Wales now is Xiao (2018) 96 NSWLR 1; [2018] NSWCCA 4. But I note, and it would be self-evident to anyone who reads the decisions of the Court of Criminal Appeal, that since the decision…
Xiao v R [2018] NSWCCA 4
Citation 2 (Para 41)

…ilitation of the course of justice. I need not discuss the relevant decisions. The leading decision in New South Wales now is Xiao (2018) 96 NSWLR 1; [2018] NSWCCA 4. But I note, and it would be self-evident to anyone who reads the decisions of the Court of Criminal Appeal, that since the decision of Xiao on every…
Dagher v The Queen [2017] NSWCCA 258
Citation 3

…ses Cited: Bugmy v R (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37 Cameron v R [2017] NSWCCA 229 Carr v R [2003] NSWCCA 175 Daghe r v R [2017] NSWCCA 258 DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 Hili and Jones v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45 Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600; [2013] H…
Cameron v R [2017] NSWCCA 229
Citation 4 (Para 42)

…for facilitating the course of justice as it was once identified in Crown submissions. In circumstances where the relevant case, Cameron v The Queen [2017] NSWCCA 229, had nothing at all to do with Commonwealth law. Anyway, be that as it may, I propose to permit that discount for the reasons I have outlined.…
Munda v Western Australia [2013] HCA 38
Citation 5 (Para 64)

…is discussed by the High Court in Bugmy v R (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37, and also the decision of Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600; [2013] HCA 38. But whilst I acknowledge there is some aspect of deprivation in the prisoner’s background and they are relevant to the sentencing exercise to some e…
Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37
Citation 6 (Para 64)

…pt the prisoner has some degree of disadvantaged upbringing in the manner in which it is discussed by the High Court in Bugmy v R (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37, and also the decision of Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600; [2013] HCA 38. But whilst I acknowledge there is some aspect of deprivation i…
Hili v The Queen [2010] HCA 45
Citation 7 (Para 58)

…sly be a number of differences or changes of emphasis and the individual factors to be considered, see Hili and Jones v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45. The cases cited, either by the Crown and by the defence, include a Court of Criminal Appeal decision of Carr from 2003, a District Court judge’s dec…
DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194
Citation 8 (Para 56)

…or mental illness. None of those matters as, for example, were discussed in the Court of Criminal Appeal decision of De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194, arise in this matter because there is no evidence suggesting such mental illness or disability existing at the time of the offending. Although the men…
R v Pipes [2004] NSWCCA 351
Citation 9

…A 38 R v Girard [2004] NSWCCA 170. R v Hawkins (1989) 45 A Crim R 430 R v Herrera (unreported) NSWCCA 6 June 1997 R v Pipes [2004] NSWCCA 351 Sutherland (unpublished) NSWDC 28 March 2013 Xiao v R (2018) 96 NSWLR 1; [2018] NSWCCA 4 Category: Sentence Parties: Regina (Crown) Ms Talaiha Inia (offender) Representation:…
R v Girard [2004] NSWCCA 170
Citation 10 (Para 57)

…aken into account as a specific and particular matter resulting in a substantial reduction or elimination of a sentence of imprisonment, Girard [2004] NSWCCA 170.…
Carr v Regina [2003] NSWCCA 175
Citation 11

…riminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) Cases Cited: Bugmy v R (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37 Cameron v R [2017] NSWCCA 229 Carr v R [2003] NSWCCA 175 Daghe r v R [2017] NSWCCA 258 DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 Hili and Jones v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45 Munda v Western Australi…

Legislation Cited

Crimes Act 1900 (ACT)
1 mention (from Para 24)
Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
1 mention (from Para 65)
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth)
1 mention

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Inia [2019] NSWDC 927
Hearing dates:	14 June 2019
Decision date:	21 June 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Norrish QC DCJ
Decision:	Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 2 years 9 months. At the expiration of 10 months of the sentence, offender to be released upon entering a recognizance of $200 for 3 years and be supervised by Community Corrections. Offender to make reparation to Commonwealth the sum of $224,246.80
Catchwords:	CRIME – Commonwealth – sentence – obtain financial advantage by deception – fraudulent claims against Medicare - multiple offences over 6 years – pre-meditated planning, deception and fraud – appropriate severity of sentence – consistency in sentencing – special circumstances – some degree of disadvantaged background – committed offences to fund day to day living expenses not a lavish lifestyle – good prospects of rehabilitation – dependency of 3rd parties – incomplete reparation
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) Criminal Code Act1995 (Cth)
Cases Cited:	Bugmy v R (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37 Cameron v R [2017] NSWCCA 229 Carr v R [2003] NSWCCA 175 Dagher v R [2017] NSWCCA 258 DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 Hili and Jones v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45 Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600; [2013] HCA 38 R v Girard [2004] NSWCCA 170. R v Hawkins (1989) 45 A Crim R 430 R v Herrera (unreported) NSWCCA 6 June 1997 R v Pipes [2004] NSWCCA 351 Sutherland (unpublished) NSWDC 28 March 2013 Xiao v R (2018) 96 NSWLR 1; [2018] NSWCCA 4
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Ms Talaiha Inia (offender)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr A Edwards (DPP (Cth)) Ms S Orman-Hales (offender)
File Number(s):	2016/00228869
Publication restriction:	No