Purves v R

[2019] NSWCCA 227

NSW Court of Criminal Appeal12 September 2019

Ratio Decidendi

Section 16BA(1) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) confers on the court before which a person is convicted a power to take additional offences into account on sentencing, subject to the court being satisfied that: (i) a list in prescribed form of the additional offences has been filed, signed by the DPP or authorised person and by the convicted person; and (ii) it is in all the circumstances appropriate to adopt the procedure. The court must then ask the convicted person whether he or she admits guilt of the additional offences and wishes to have them taken into account.

Quick Take

The procedure under s 16BA(1) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) for taking additional offences into account on sentencing must be undertaken by the court before which the person was convicted; an appellate court cannot remedy a failure to comply with the procedure by undertaking it on appeal. Failure to make the statutory inquiries constitutes a fundamental sentencing error requiring the sentence to be set aside and the matter remitted.

Headnote

No headnote yet — we'll generate the full structured AI headnote for you.

Generate the headnote

Free trial · no card required

Linked Principles

Legal principles extracted from this case

01Section 16BA(1) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) confers on the court before which a person is convicted a power to take additional offences into account on sentencing, subject to the court being satisfied that: (i) a list in prescribed form of the additional offences has been filed, signed by the DPP or authorised person and by the convicted person; and (ii) it is in all the circumstances appropriate to adopt the procedure. The court must then ask the convicted person whether he or she admits guilt of the additional offences and wishes to have them taken into account.
02
03
04

Start free trial

Free trial — no card required

Case Details

Citation[2019] NSWCCA 227

CourtNSWCCA

JurisdictionNsw

Decision Date12 September 2019

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

Start free trial

No card · cancel anytime

Judgment

Authorities Cited2›

Cases considered by Purves v R

Referred to (2)

Purves v R [2019] NSWCCA 227 [2014] NSWCCA 101

Subsequent Judicial Consideration3›

Cases that have considered Purves v R

Referred to (3)

Dale v R [2021] NSWCCA 320 Kabir v R [2020] NSWCCA 139 Purves v R [2019] NSWCCA 227

Judicial Consideration (Chronological)

Dale v R [2021] NSWCCA 320Referred to

Kabir v R [2020] NSWCCA 139Referred to

Purves v R [2019] NSWCCA 227Referred to

Where a party seeks to rely upon an estoppel by convention, the party must demonstrate that the common assumption was shared by both parties and that it would be unconscionable to permit departure from it

Where a party seeks to rely upon an estoppel by convention, the party must demonstrate that the common assumption was shared by both parties and that it would be unconscionable to permit departure from it.

Purves v R at [30]

The duty of a solicitor to advise a client of the risks of litigation extends to advising on the prospects of recovery of costs in the event of success, particularly where the opposing party may lack the means to satisfy a costs order

The duty of a solicitor to advise a client of the risks of litigation extends to advising on the prospects of recovery of costs in the event of success, particularly where the opposing party may lack the means to satisfy a costs order.

Purves v R at [37]