372 results
In the matter of Michael Curran, A Solicitor and in the matter of a decision of the Solicitors' Disciplinary Tribunal
[2024] NIKB 97 Colton J
Christopher Hughes and Associated Newspapers LTD T/A The Daily Mail
[2024] NIMaster 24 Master Bell
Summary of judgment - R v Glenn Rainey, Walter Alan Ervine and Robert Spiers
Summary of judgment - R v Glenn Rainey, Walter Alan Ervine and Robert Spiers
R v Glenn Rainey, Walter Alan Ervine and Robert Spiers
[2024] NICC 32 McFarland J
Law Society of Northern Ireland and Ian Mallon
[2024] NIKB 101 Keegan LCJ
King v Thomasena Byrne
GENERAL
1. Deterrence means discouraging the offender before the court, and others, from committing offences of the kind in question and/or more generally: paras [8] – [9]
2. Every sentence has an inbuilt element of deterrence (the concept of “general deterrence”): paras [8] – [9] & [11]
3. In some cases the sentencing court may decide that deterrence of the offender and/or the public, in the sense explained in [1] above, requires particular emphasis, the consequence being that a punishment more punitive than would otherwise be merited may follow (the concept of “particular deterrence” / an “expressly deterrent sentence”): paras [11] – [13]
4. In cases belonging to the latter category, adherence to the guidance in QWL paras [102] – [103] is essential: para [14]
5. Where sentencing guidelines decisions of the NICOA incorporate an element of specific (as distinct from general) deterrence, the sentencing court must avoid double counting.
6. “ … an offender’s personal circumstances will rarely qualify to be accorded much weight, particularly in a context where a deterrent sentence is required.” (para [18] quoting QWL para [98] )
THIS CASE
7. In the fact specific context of this case. First, per para [21]
“ … the judge’s approach to the issue of personal mitigation was in substance one of applying an absolute rule and, hence, not compatible with the principles expounded above, in a context of having erroneously declared this to be a case requiring deterrence, without more. The judge should have approached the issue of personal mitigation more flexibly and, having done so, explained the weight which he had determined to allocate to it. The impugned sentencing decision is not to this effect. Furthermore, the judge’s decision is not in accordance with the QWL guidance at paras [102]–[103].”
This passage identifies two material judicial errors. The first error entailed a judicial failure to recognise that the general rule in play viz the need for a deterrent sentence normally entails attributing little weight to personal mitigation factors is not absolute in nature.
8. Second, per para [22]: The COA was influenced by the newly admitted evidence.
McMinnis' (Robin) Application for Judicial Review
[2024] NICA 77 McCloskey LJ
King v Lesley Ann Dodds
[2024] NICA 74 Keegan LCJ
Daniel McAteer v Declan Magee & Others
[2024] NICA 73
Thompson (William) Application for Judicial Review
[2024] NIKB 92 Scoffield J
Patrick Frizzell as personal representative of the estate of Brian Frizzell (deceased) and The Chief Constable of The Police Service of Northern Ireland and Others
[2024] NIKB 93 Humphreys J
King v Michael Gerard McMonagle
[2024] NICC 31 His Honour Judge Rafferty KC
King v Vladimar Kovac
The Court of Appeal provides assistance to sentencing judges on the imposition of an interim driving disqualification after conviction and pre-sentence at paragraphs [23] – [26]. The Court of Appeal recommends that in cases of this nature (causing death by dangerous driving where a mandatory disqualification applies) an interim disqualification should be imposed post-conviction. The court also points out that prior to a plea of guilty a court considering bail may also impose restrictions upon driving depending on the circumstances of a particular case.
Appeal with leave of the single judge in respect of a nine and a half year sentence and 10 year driving disqualification – death by dangerous driving – whether both aspects of the sentence were manifestly excessive – guideline case of R v McCartney [2007] NICA 41 applied – exceptionally bad example of dangerous driving – fell into most serious culpability bracket – high harm – both aspects of the sentence held to be within the appropriate range – appeal dismissed.
Frances Quinn and Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland
[2024] NIMaster 23 Master Bell
Catholic Mothers Ireland v Charity Commission for Northern Ireland
3/24 - Catholic Mothers Ireland v Charity Commission for Northern Ireland Mr McMahon
Disabled Police Officers' Association of Northern Ireland and Charity Commission for Northern Ireland
[2024] NIKB 90 McBride J
King v Alexander McCartney
Crown Court sentencing remarks – catfishing – sextortion - manslaughter - causing or inciting girls under 13 and between the age of 13 and 16 to engage in sexual activity – blackmail – making, distributing and possessing indecent images of children – causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent - intimidation - sexual communication with a child - offending against 70 victims worldwide – harm inevitably and indisputably huge – assessed as presenting a significant risk of serious harm – victim did not prove on the balance of probabilities that he was the victim of catfishing as a child – no previous record – pleas of guilty – some limited evidence of remorse post 2019 – numerous aggravating factors outlined at para [77] - extensive and worsening offending after his first arrest in 2016 – life sentence imposed – 20 year minimum tariff imposed with concurrent sentences in respect of the remaining counts – 10 year SOPO – disqualified from working with children – disposal order in respect of 13 devices
[2024] NICC 30 O'Hara J
Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland's Application
[2024] NIKB 88 Humphreys J