R v Sulaiman
Case
•
[2025] NSWDC 415
•20 October 2025
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
R v Sulaiman [2025] NSWDC 415
[2025] NSWDC 415
20 October 2025
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The case of R v Sulaiman was heard by the Supreme Court of Victoria, where the defendant, Sulaiman, faced charges relating to obtaining a financial advantage by deception and dealing with the proceeds of crime. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate sentence for Sulaiman, who had pleaded guilty to multiple charges. The prosecution argued for a significant custodial sentence, citing the severity and frequency of the offences, while the defence sought a more lenient approach, emphasising Sulaiman’s background and potential for rehabilitation.
The legal issues before the court included the calculation of an aggregate sentence for the multiple offences and the consideration of an intensive correction order as an alternative to imprisonment. The court had to weigh the principles of denunciation and deterrence against the rehabilitative potential of an intensive correction order. It was also necessary to consider the impact of the offences on the victims and the community, as well as Sulaiman's personal circumstances, including his background and prospects for rehabilitation.
In delivering the judgment, the court found that while the offences were serious and demonstrated a pattern of dishonest behaviour, there were mitigating factors that warranted consideration of an alternative to imprisonment. The court was persuaded by evidence of Sulaiman’s remorse, his limited criminal history, and the potential for an intensive correction order to address the underlying issues that led to his offending behaviour. After considering all the circumstances, the court determined that an intensive correction order was the appropriate sentence, aiming to balance the need for punishment with the opportunity for rehabilitation.
The final orders included a sentence of imprisonment to be served concurrently with an intensive correction order, reflecting the court's balanced approach to sentencing. The order also detailed specific conditions that Sulaiman must adhere to as part of the intensive correction order, aimed at ensuring his rehabilitation and preventing reoffending.
The legal issues before the court included the calculation of an aggregate sentence for the multiple offences and the consideration of an intensive correction order as an alternative to imprisonment. The court had to weigh the principles of denunciation and deterrence against the rehabilitative potential of an intensive correction order. It was also necessary to consider the impact of the offences on the victims and the community, as well as Sulaiman's personal circumstances, including his background and prospects for rehabilitation.
In delivering the judgment, the court found that while the offences were serious and demonstrated a pattern of dishonest behaviour, there were mitigating factors that warranted consideration of an alternative to imprisonment. The court was persuaded by evidence of Sulaiman’s remorse, his limited criminal history, and the potential for an intensive correction order to address the underlying issues that led to his offending behaviour. After considering all the circumstances, the court determined that an intensive correction order was the appropriate sentence, aiming to balance the need for punishment with the opportunity for rehabilitation.
The final orders included a sentence of imprisonment to be served concurrently with an intensive correction order, reflecting the court's balanced approach to sentencing. The order also detailed specific conditions that Sulaiman must adhere to as part of the intensive correction order, aimed at ensuring his rehabilitation and preventing reoffending.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Criminal Law
Legal Concepts
-
Mens Rea & Intention
-
Sentencing
-
Intensive Correction Order
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
R v Sulaiman [2025] NSWDC 415
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
30
Statutory Material Cited
2
Badaric v The King
[2025] NSWCCA 117
Bugmy v The Queen
[2013] HCA 37
Bugmy v The Queen
[2013] HCA 37