Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2004] All ER (D) 08 (Aug)
Neutral Citation: [2004] EWCA Crim 1691
Court: Court of Appeal, Criminal Division
Judge:

Curtis and Newman JJ

Representation Farrhat Arshad (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for B.
  Paul Phillips (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for L.
  Nick Stanage (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for E and T.
  Kama Melly (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for H.
  Laurie-Anne Power (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for S.
  Stephen Bentley (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for R.
  Andrew Kershaw (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) for the prosecution.
Judgment Dates: 18 June 2004

Catchwords

Sentencing - Threatening behaviour - Custodial sentence - Disparity of sentence between joint offenders - Discounts for guilty pleas.

The Case

When a defendant was seeking to appeal against his sentence on the basis that it was manifestly excessive when compared to sentences imposed on co-defendants who had pleaded guilty at the first opportunity, there had to be something of real substance so as to show that there had not been a fair trial on sentence, such as there being no rational basis for the judge's discretion or judgment as the case might be. In the instant case, it had been made absolutely clear to all defendants at a very early stage that early guilty pleas would attract substantial discounts and, in all the circumstances, the defendants had suffered no unfairness in that regard, nor was the difference in sentences such that the Court should interfere.

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.