R v Wise

The case of R v Wise involved a dispute over the sentencing of the accused, Wise, by the Court of Appeal. Wise had been sentenced by a sentencing judge who imposed a community based order. Subsequently, a re-sentencing was ordered by another judge who had access to the reasons given by the original sentencing judge. The primary dispute was whether the re-sentencing was conducted with due regard to procedural fairness, particularly whether the re-sentencing judge had breached the principle of fairness by not providing the reasons for the original sentencing to the parties involved.

The legal issues the court had to decide included whether the re-sentencing judge was required to provide the reasons for the original sentencing to the parties, and if not providing those reasons constituted a breach of procedural fairness. Additionally, the court had to consider whether incorporating parts of the earlier reasons by reference, without providing copies to the parties, was consistent with the principles of natural justice.

The court held that the re-sentencing judge should have ensured that the parties had access to the reasons for the original sentencing, as these reasons formed a crucial part of the basis for the re-sentencing. The court found that the re-sentencing judge had not acted fairly by stating that the reasons were "only available to judges" and by not providing the parties with copies of these reasons. Furthermore, the court concluded that by incorporating part of the earlier reasons by reference without providing them to the parties, the re-sentencing judge had not adhered to the principles of natural justice. The court ordered a new sentencing hearing to be conducted with full procedural fairness, ensuring that all relevant reasons were made available to the parties.