The appellant, a young person, appealed an order transferring him to adult court for numerous offences including robbery, unlawful confinement, and related property offences.
The Court of Appeal held that the youth court judge erred in concluding that the maximum youth sentence was inadequate to protect the public and failed to give sufficient weight to the appellant's excellent progress in secure custody.
The court found that the objectives of public protection and rehabilitation could be reconciled within the youth justice system.
The appeal was allowed and the Crown's transfer application was dismissed.
