The appellant appealed a sentence of 30 days custody imposed for being an unregistered motor vehicle dealer contrary to section 4(1)(a) of the Motor Vehicle Dealers Act, 2002.
The sentencing judge imposed custody based on the appellant's prior convictions for fraud, unpaid fines and restitution, and an outstanding restitution order.
The appellate court found two errors in principle: first, the sentencing objective was specific deterrence of the appellant rather than general deterrence within a regulatory framework; second, the sentencing judge improperly equated the appellant's past fraudulent conduct with the regulatory offence of being an unregistered dealer.
The court held that the 30-day custodial sentence was clearly excessive and varied it to a fine of $7,500.00 plus administrative costs.
