R v Bruno Claudio Sala

For multiple sexual offences, a notional determinate sentence above about 30 years is reserved for the comparatively rare cases involving particularly serious offending. Earlier exceptionally grave cases do not create a general sentencing benchmark. The sentence must be calibrated against the whole course of conduct and the relative seriousness of the offending. Here, coercive and violent sexual offending against four victims justified a notional term of 38 years, but not the much higher levels imposed in the most exceptional cases. After the one-third reduction and credit for 1,323 days in custody, the concurrent minimum terms were 21 years and 258 days. The approach in R v AYO [2022] EWCA Crim 1271 was applied.

The Solicitor General sought leave under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to refer sentences imposed on Bruno Claudio Sala as unduly lenient. Leave was granted. Following trials concerning offences against three victims, the Crown Court at Portsmouth imposed seven concurrent life sentences with a minimum term of 16 years and 137 days, together with concurrent determinate sentences for assault occasioning actual bodily harm.

The judge had also previously sentenced the offender for later offences against a fourth victim. In fixing the later minimum terms, he reflected the offending against all four victims and gave credit for time spent in custody. The Solicitor General accepted that approach but contended that the notional determinate sentence of 30 years was too low. The central issue was whether a term exceeding 30 years was justified by the particular seriousness of the offending.

The court granted leave under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 and allowed the reference to the extent that the minimum terms were increased.

1. The sentencing judge had correctly applied the relevant guidelines, considered each offence separately, found no mitigation, and concluded that the offender was dangerous and that life sentences were required. The individual guideline sentences were not to be aggregated mechanically. The minimum term had properly been fixed by reference to the whole course of offending, including the offences against the fourth victim and the custody credit arising from the earlier sentence. The sole error was the selection of a 30-year notional determinate sentence.

2. The guidance in R v AYO [2022] EWCA Crim 1271; [2023] 1 Cr App R(S) 2024 provided sufficient guidance. A sentence exceeding about 30 years for multiple sexual offences was comparatively rare and appropriate where the offending was particularly serious. The decisions in Attorney General's Reference (R v JRM) [2021] EWCA Crim 524 and Attorney General's Reference (R v Wilson) [2021] EWCA Crim 839 did not establish a general upward benchmark.

3. The offending against all four victims amounted to a particularly serious course of conduct. It therefore fell within the comparatively rare category in which a term above 30 years was justified. It was nevertheless less serious than the offending demonstrated by McCann, Sinaga and JRM, where terms well in excess of 40 years had been derived. A notional determinate sentence of 38 years was appropriate.

4. After the one-third reduction for the early release provisions, the term became 25 years and four months. The court quashed the sentences on the seven life-sentence counts only and substituted concurrent minimum terms of 25 years and four months. After deducting 1,323 days for time spent on remand and serving the earlier sentence, the minimum terms to be served were 21 years and 258 days. All other sentences and orders stood unaffected. The statutory surcharge order was declared accurately recorded.

• Crown Court at Portsmouth: On 28 November 2025, His Honour Judge Michael Bowes KC imposed seven concurrent life sentences with a minimum term of 16 years and 137 days, together with concurrent determinate sentences for assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): On 31 March 2026, on a reference under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, the court substituted concurrent minimum terms producing 21 years and 258 days to serve.