The Sentencing Council has published its response to the fourth annual miscellaneous amendments consultation. The amendments, applicable to both Crown Court and magistrates’ courts, address updates necessitated by case law, legislative changes and feedback from sentencers. Key revisions include new guidance on fines for offenders with variable incomes, updates to the careless driving guideline and changes to the sentencing of children and young people, including the potential reclassification of under 18 offenders as ‘children’. Additionally, the amendments include updates to guidelines on shop theft, benefit fraud and revenue fraud, with a new sentencing table introduced for offences carrying a maximum penalty of 14 years.

The Sentencing Council has published a simplified version of the SentencingACE tool, intended to assist sentencers in the Crown Court in noting the relevant statutory provisions and sentencing guidelines when sentencing for an offence.

The Sentencing Council has published two new sentencing guidelines for sentencing individuals and companies that sell or possess counterfeit goods intended for sale following a consultation that ran from 8 July 2020–30 September 2020. According to the Sentencing Council, the most severe sentences will be imposed on sophisticated operations, and those that present a significant risk of harm or death to end users. The new guidelines will enter into force on 1 October 2021.

The Sentencing Council has submitted a response to the Lord Chancellor regarding her 20 March 2025 letter about the revised Imposition of community and custodial sentences guideline.

The Chairman of the Sentencing Council (SC), Lord Justice William Davis, has written to the Lord Chancellor defending the recently published Imposition guideline. The letter responds to concerns about the inclusion of ethnic, cultural and faith minorities in a list of cohorts for whom pre-sentence reports will normally be considered necessary. Davis explains the guideline was developed over 15 council meetings between July 2022 and January 2025, received 150 consultation responses and was unanimously approved. Davis emphasises the guideline does not mandate differential sentencing based on ethnicity, but aims to ensure courts have sufficient information before sentencing.

The Sentencing Council has published its response to the Justice Committee’s inquiry and report into Public Opinion and Understanding of Sentencing. The Sentencing Council welcomes the report and outlines its view on the recommendations in relation to the Sentencing Council’s work including the public understanding of sentencing, public opinion of sentencing and public understanding of sentencing and public confidence in the criminal justice system.

The Sentencing Council has submitted its evidence to the Independent Sentencing Review 2024-2025 in response to a call for evidence. The review, led by the Rt Hon David Gauke, is a significant examination of sentencing practices in the UK. The Sentencing Council's submission forms part of the evidence-gathering process for this comprehensive review, which is expected to culminate in the publication of findings in Spring 2025. This development represents a crucial step in the ongoing evaluation and potential reform of sentencing guidelines and practices within the UK legal system.

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has announced that the Sentencing Guidelines (Pre-sentence Reports) Act 2025 has received Royal Assent. The Act prohibits the implementation of sentencing guidelines mandating differential treatment in pre-sentence report requirements based on personal characteristics, such as race, ethnicity or religion. This measure is intended to avoid a two-tier justice system while preserving the existing discretionary power of courts to request pre-sentence reports on a case-by-case basis (including for pregnant women, young people, and cases involving domestic abuse). Applicable in England and Wales, this legislation comes in response to formal objections raised by the Lord Chancellor to the Sentencing Council's revised Imposition guideline, published on 5 March 2025.

This Practice Note summarises the Sentencing Council’s guidelines for sentencing corporate offences of bribery in the Crown Court and magistrates’ court. The court is required to follow these sentencing guidelines when sentencing a corporate offender unless it is satisfied it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so. The court should impose a sentence within the offence range, subject to a reduction for a guilty plea, a discount in consequence of assistance given, totality, or where the court is of the opinion that none of the categories sufficiently resemble the offender’s case. For guidance on sentencing guidelines generally, see Practice Note: Sentencing criminal offences—sentencing guidelines and resources. For information on sentencing generally, see Practice Notes: Sentencing procedure in the magistrates’ and Crown Courts and Sentences imposed following conviction. Bribery committed by a corporate offender Corporate bodies can be convicted of offences under sections 1, 2 and 6 of the Bribery Act 2010 (BA 2010), all of which are offences triable either way. Corporate offenders can also be convicted of failure to prevent

This Checklist summarises the Sentencing Council’s guidelines for sentencing corporate offences of fraud under the Fraud Act 2006 (FrA 2006), Theft Act 1968 (TA 1968), Value Added Tax Act 1994 (VATA 1994) and Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 (CEMA 1979) in the Crown Court and magistrates’ court. The Fraud Guidelines for corporate offenders can be accessed here. The Sentencing Council also publishes a number of overarching guidelines, which should be considered in respect of all sentencing exercises. This includes: • Totality guideline • Overarching principles • Overarching guideline on reduction in sentence for a guilty plea For guidance on sentencing guidelines generally, see Practice Notes: Sentencing criminal offences—sentencing guidelines and resources and Sentences imposed following conviction. Among these overarching guidelines, the General guideline: overarching principles (the General guideline) is specifically designed to be used in conjunction with offence-specific sentencing guidelines. It addresses seriousness and provides expanded guidance on aggravating and mitigating factors, culpability and harm, see Practice Note: Sentencing Council General Guideline: Overarching Principles—Using the General Guideline in conjunction

This Checklist summarises the Sentencing Council’s guidelines for money laundering offences committed by a corporate which can be accessed here. The Sentencing Council also publishes a number of overarching guidelines, which should be considered in respect of all sentencing exercises. These include: • Sentencing Guideline—Totality • General guideline—overarching principles • Sentencing Guideline—Reduction in sentence for a guilty plea For more information, see Practice Note: Sentences imposed following conviction. Among these overarching guidelines, the General guideline: overarching principles (the General guideline) is specifically designed to be used in conjunction with offence specific guidelines and covers seriousness as well as providing expanded explanations for aggravating and mitigating factors, culpability and harm, see Practice Note: Sentencing Council General Guideline: Overarching Principles—Using the General Guideline in conjunction with offence specific definitive guidelines. See further, Practice Note: Sentencing criminal offences—sentencing guidelines and resources. Money laundering committed by a corporate offender The maximum sentence for money laundering under the sections 327, 328 and 329 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002) for offences committed by a corporate

Corporate Crime analysis: The Court of Appeal combined three separate otherwise unrelated cases to consider the approach to totality when sentencing a defendant for an offence contrary to the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA 2002) which represents a criminal benefit for other substantive offences. The court reviewed the authorities in respect of totality and whether a sentence should be consecutive or concurrent. The court identified the following principles when approaching the sentencing exercise—the overriding consideration will be whether the overall sentence is the shortest term that is commensurate with the seriousness of the offence, or the combination of the offence and one or more offences associated with it; where the POCA 2002 offending adds nothing to the culpability and harm of the substantive offending, it will be appropriate to impose a concurrent sentence with no upward adjustment; where POCA 2002 offending involves additional criminality (either culpability or harm) then there ought to be an increase in sentence either by way of an aggravated sentence for the substantive offending or by way of a consecutive sentence. Written by Rhys Rosser, barrister at 2 Bedford Row.