In court

AuthorNigel Stone
Published date01 September 2005
Date01 September 2005
DOIhttp://doi.org/10.1177/0264550505055157
Subject MatterArticles
Nigel Stone, Senior Lecturer in the School of Social Work, University of East Anglia,
reviews recent appeal judgements and other judicial developments that inform
sentencing and early release.
General sentencing issues
Sentencing benef‌it fraud
The Court of Appeal has taken the opportunity to consider afresh the appropriate
level of sentence in benef‌its fraud, a form of crime for which the Stewart judge-
ment (1987) has long offered authoritative guidelines. Though that judgement’s
identif‌ication of aggravating and mitigating features in such fraud is still to be
regarded as sound, this further review was prompted f‌irst by the effect of inf‌lation,
£1 in 1987 being now the equivalent of approximately £1.80. Accordingly,
reference in Stewart to over-payment of £10,000, as an appropriate value
boundary for sentencing purposes between cases that can be dealt with either
non-custodially or by custodial terms up to 12 months, has been in need of
revision. Second, the Appeal Court wanted to consider whether it remains the case
that deterrence is a factor of limited application in such cases, as Stewart had
assumed on the basis that this consideration is unlikely to feature in the thinking
of a potential fraudster. Third, the Court wanted to review whether the guidelines
ref‌lect recent sentencing practice.
As regards the second and third prompting issues, the Appeal Court noted that
social security fraud is increasingly prevalent, the overwhelming majority being
committed where the offender has been lawfully in receipt of benef‌it but fails to
inform the Benef‌its Agency of changes of circumstances affecting their entitlement,
and by those with the benef‌it of substantial mitigation, such as previous good
character and/or responsibility for dependent children. The Court concluded that
‘there will be cases in which a sentence should properly ref‌lect an element of
deterrence.’ Such an instance was illustrated by Armour and Sherlock (1997), a
case featuring conspiracy to obtain payments by obtaining and using stolen benef‌it
books, where a term of 18 months’ imprisonment was upheld even though the
sums obtained were relatively limited, being £1300 and £809. It also considered
that recent appeal judgements in this f‌ield of crime have been broadly consistent
with Stewart, save in instances of particular aggravating features and to the valid
313
Probation Journal
The Journal of Community and Criminal Justice
Copyright © 2005 NAPO Vol 52(3): 313–325
DOI: 10.1177/0264550505055157
www.napo.org.uk
www.sagepublications.com
In court
09_055157_InCourt (JB-D) 27/7/05 3:30 pm Page 313

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT