The offender was sentenced following a conviction of 13 counts of dishonestly obtaining a financial advantage from a Commonwealth entity by deception contrary to s 134.2(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code and 2 counts of attempting to dishonestly obtain a financial advantage from a Commonwealth entity by deception contrary to ss 11.1 and 134.2(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code. Original sentence imposed 6 years imprisonment for 10 counts which were committed solely and 4 months imprisonment for 5 counts which were jointly charged with the offender’s former wife, with a non-parole period of 3 years and 6 months. Offender appealed on the sole ground that the sentence was manifestly excessive.
Manifest Excessive: Offender obtained a total of $192,434.86 and attempted to obtain a further $75,685 in GST refunds to which they were not entitled to. It is important to recognise that the sentence was imposed following convictions entered after a jury trial. There has been no guilty plea nor demonstrated contrition or remorse by the offender. The limited recovery made by the ATO to date was only by way of a garnishee order. Offender was able to offend because they had acquired specialised knowledge whilst working with the ATO and as such their offending represented a very serious breach of trust. Both general and personal deterrence were particularly important sentencing considerations. When the full extent of the offending and the offender’s personal circumstances are taken into account, it cannot be said that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. Whilst it may be considered high, it is neither unreasonable nor unjust.
Leave to appeal granted. Appeal dismissed.
Manifest Excessive: Offender obtained a total of $192,434.86 and attempted to obtain a further $75,685 in GST refunds to which they were not entitled to. It is important to recognise that the sentence was imposed following convictions entered after a jury trial. There has been no guilty plea nor demonstrated contrition or remorse by the offender. The limited recovery made by the ATO to date was only by way of a garnishee order. Offender was able to offend because they had acquired specialised knowledge whilst working with the ATO and as such their offending represented a very serious breach of trust. Both general and personal deterrence were particularly important sentencing considerations. When the full extent of the offending and the offender’s personal circumstances are taken into account, it cannot be said that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. Whilst it may be considered high, it is neither unreasonable nor unjust.
Leave to appeal granted. Appeal dismissed.
