Sentencing Snapshot no. 287 describes sentencing outcomes for the offence of arson in the County and Supreme Courts of Victoria from 2018-19 to 2022-23.
This is the most recent Snapshot for this offence.
You can access case summaries for arson from the Judicial College of Victoria’s Sentencing Manual Case Summaries.
You can also access statistics for arson on SACStat.
Authored and published by the Sentencing Advisory Council
© State of Victoria, Sentencing Advisory Council, 2024
Snapshot 287: Arson
Introduction
This Sentencing Snapshot describes sentencing outcomes for the offence of arson[1] in the County and Supreme Courts of Victoria (the higher courts) from 2018-19 to 2022-23.[2] Adjustments made by the Court of Appeal to sentence or conviction as at June 2023 have been incorporated into the data in this Snapshot.
Detailed data on arson and other offences is also available on SACStat.
A person who intentionally and without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another by setting it on fire is guilty of arson. A person is deemed to have destroyed or damaged the property intentionally if it was the person's purpose to do so or if the person was aware that their conduct was more likely than not to result in the damage to or destruction of the property. Arson is an indictable offence that carries a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment or a fine of 1,800 penalty units.[3] It can be tried summarily in the Magistrates' Court if certain criteria are met.[4]
This Snapshot focuses on cases where arson was the principal offence, that is, cases where arson was the offence that received the most severe sentence.[5]
Arson was the principal offence in 1.6% of cases sentenced in the higher courts between 2018-19 and 2022-23.
Effect of COVID-19 on sentencing data
The data in this Snapshot is likely to have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic particularly in the 2020-21 and 2021-22 financial years. For instance:
- the number of people sentenced in the period after March 2020 may be lower than in other years because the pandemic caused delays in court proceedings
- court backlogs may have led to prioritisation of more serious cases in that period and therefore higher imprisonment rates than in other years
- prison sentences may be shorter during that period than in other years to reflect the combined effect of:
- guilty pleas having an 'augmented mitigatory effect' (Worboyes v The Queen [2021] VSCA 169) because they help to relieve the strain on the justice system and
- the experience of prison being more burdensome due to increased stress on prisoners and their families and changes in custodial conditions.
People sentenced
From 2018-19 to 2022-23, 138 people were sentenced in the higher courts for a principal offence of arson.
Figure 1 shows the number of people sentenced for the principal offence of arson by financial year. There were 25 people sentenced for this offence in 2022-23, down from 31 in the previous year. The number of people sentenced was highest in 2021-22 (31 people) and lowest in 2020-21 (24 people).
There was also 1 person who received a custodial supervision order and 6 people who received a non-custodial supervision order for the principal offence of arson during the five-year period. These outcomes are not included elsewhere in this Snapshot.[6]
Figure 1: The number of people sentenced for arson, by financial year
| Financial Year | Number |
|---|---|
| 2018-19 | 29 |
| 2019-20 | 29 |
| 2020-21 | 24 |
| 2021-22 | 31 |
| 2022-23 | 25 |
| Total | 138 |
Sentence types and trends
Figure 2 shows the proportion of people who received an immediate custodial sentence or non-custodial sentence for the principal offence of arson. An immediate custodial sentence involves at least some element of immediate imprisonment or detention.[7] The rate of immediate custodial sentences was lowest in 2018-19 (82.8%) and highest in 2021-22 (96.8%). Over the five-year period, 87.7% of people were given an immediate custodial sentence.
Figure 2: The percentage of people who received an immediate custodial sentence or non-custodial sentence for arson, by financial year
| Financial Year | Immediate custodial sentence | Non-custodial sentence |
|---|---|---|
| 2018-19 | 82.8% | 17.2% |
| 2019-20 | 89.7% | 10.3% |
| 2020-21 | 83.3% | 16.7% |
| 2021-22 | 96.8% | 3.2% |
| 2022-23 | 84.0% | 16.0% |
Table 1 shows the principal sentence types imposed for arson from 2018-19 to 2022-23. The principal sentence is the most serious sentence imposed for the principal offence in a case.[8]
Over the five-year period, most people sentenced for arson received a principal sentence of imprisonment (86.2% or 119 of 138 people). The remaining people received a community correction order (10.9% or 15 people), a youth justice centre order (1.4% or 2 people), or an adjourned undertaking (1.4% or 2 people).[9]
Table 1: The number and percentage of people sentenced for arson, by principal sentence type and financial year
| Sentence type | 2018-19 | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Imprisonment | 22 (75.9%) | 26 (89.7%) | 20 (83.3%) | 30 (96.8%) | 21 (84.0%) | 119 (86.2%) |
| Community correction order | 4 (13.8%) | 3 (10.3%) | 4 (16.7%) | 1 (3.2%) | 3 (12.0%) | 15 (10.9%) |
| Youth justice centre order | 2 (6.9%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (1.4%) |
| Adjourned undertaking | 1 (3.4%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (4.0%) | 2 (1.4%) |
| Total | 29 | 29 | 24 | 31 | 25 | 138 |
Principal and total effective sentences of imprisonment
The following sections analyse the use of imprisonment for the principal offence of arson from 2018-19 to 2022-23.
The principal sentence describes sentences for the offence at a charge level.
The total effective sentence is the sentence imposed for all charges in a case and applies at a case level. Where a case involves multiple charges, the total effective sentence will be either the same as or longer than the principal sentence.
Principal sentences of imprisonment
There were 119 principal sentences of imprisonment for arson. Table 2 shows that 101 of those (84.9%) were non-aggregate imprisonment terms, and 18 were aggregate imprisonment terms.[10] There were 52 people who received a community correction order in addition to their imprisonment term.
Table 2: The number and percentage of people sentenced to imprisonment for arson, by sentence type and financial year
| Imprisonment type | 2018-19 | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Imprisonment | 15 (71.4%) | 13 (54.2%) | 10 (66.7%) | 15 (65.2%) | 11 (61.1%) | 64 (63.4%) |
| Imprisonment and community correction order | 6 (28.6%) | 11 (45.8%) | 5 (33.3%) | 8 (34.8%) | 7 (38.9%) | 37 (36.6%) |
| Total non-aggregate imprisonment | 21 (95.5%) | 24 (92.3%) | 15 (75.0%) | 23 (76.7%) | 18 (85.7%) | 101 (84.9%) |
| Aggregate imprisonment | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (50.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (14.3%) | 1 (33.3%) | 3 (16.7%) |
| Aggregate imprisonment and community correction order | 1 (100.0%) | 1 (50.0%) | 5 (100.0%) | 6 (85.7%) | 2 (66.7%) | 15 (83.3%) |
| Total aggregate imprisonment | 1 (4.5%) | 2 (7.7%) | 5 (25.0%) | 7 (23.3%) | 3 (14.3%) | 18 (15.1%) |
| Total people sentenced to imprisonment | 22 | 26 | 20 | 30 | 21 | 119 |
Figure 3 shows the imprisonment lengths for the 101 non-aggregate imprisonment terms for the principal offence of arson. Imprisonment lengths ranged from 1 month to 8 years,[11] while the median imprisonment length was 2 years and 6 months.
The most common range of imprisonment lengths was less than 1 year (24 principal sentences).
Figure 3: The number of principal sentences of imprisonment for arson, by range of imprisonment lengths, 2018-19 to 2022-23
| Imprisonment length | Number |
|---|---|
| Less than 1 year | 24 |
| 1 to less than 2 years | 22 |
| 2 to less than 3 years | 21 |
| 3 to less than 4 years | 17 |
| 4 to less than 5 years | 9 |
| 5 to less than 6 years | 5 |
| 6 to less than 7 years | 1 |
| 7 to less than 8 years | 0 |
| 8 to less than 9 years | 2 |
| Total | 101 |
Figure 4 shows the average length of the 101 non-aggregate imprisonment terms for the principal offence of arson each financial year. The average imprisonment length ranged from 1 year and 8 months in 2020-21 to 3 years and 1 month in 2018-19. Over the five-year period, the average imprisonment length for arson was 2 years and 4 months.
Figure 4: The average imprisonment length imposed for arson, by financial year
| Financial year | Number of people | Average imprisonment length |
|---|---|---|
| 2018-19 | 21 | 3 years and 1 month |
| 2019-20 | 24 | 1 year and 10 months |
| 2020-21 | 15 | 1 year and 8 months |
| 2021-22 | 23 | 2 years and 5 months |
| 2022-23 | 18 | 2 years and 7 months |
Total effective sentences of imprisonment
Figure 5 shows the lengths of total effective sentences of imprisonment in cases where arson was the principal offence. Total effective sentences ranged from 1 month to 11 years,[12] while the median total effective sentence was 1 year and 9 months.
The most common range of total effective sentences was less than 1 year (33 cases).
Figure 5: The number of people sentenced to imprisonment for arson, by range of total effective sentences, 2018-19 to 2022-23
| Total effective sentence length | Number |
|---|---|
| Less than 1 year | 33 |
| 1 to less than 2 years | 27 |
| 2 to less than 3 years | 16 |
| 3 to less than 4 years | 20 |
| 4 to less than 5 years | 9 |
| 5 to less than 6 years | 5 |
| 6 to less than 7 years | 3 |
| 7 to less than 8 years | 4 |
| 8 to less than 9 years | 0 |
| 9 to less than 10 years | 1 |
| 10 to less than 11 years | 0 |
| 11 to less than 12 years | 1 |
| Total | 119 |
Non-parole periods
If a person is sentenced to an imprisonment term of less than 1 year, the court cannot impose a non-parole period. For imprisonment terms between 1 year and less than 2 years, the court has the discretion to fix a non-parole period. For imprisonment terms of 2 years or more, the court must impose a non-parole period in most circumstances. If the court fixes a non-parole period, the person must serve that period before becoming eligible for parole. If the court does not set a non-parole period, the person must serve the entirety of their imprisonment term in custody.
Of the 119 people who were sentenced to imprisonment for the principal offence of arson, 86 were eligible to have a non-parole period fixed.[13] Of these people, 59 were given a non-parole period (68.6%).[14] It was not possible to determine the non-parole period for 1 of those people.[15]
Figure 6 shows the lengths of non-parole periods for people sentenced to imprisonment for the principal offence of arson. Non-parole periods ranged from 10 months to 7 years, while the median non-parole period was 2 years and 2 months.
The most common ranges of non-parole periods were 1 to less than 2 years and 2 to less than 3 years (17 people each).
Figure 6: The number of people sentenced to imprisonment for arson, by range of non-parole periods, 2018-19 to 2022-23
| Non-parole period | Number |
|---|---|
| Less than 1 year | 4 |
| 1 to less than 2 years | 17 |
| 2 to less than 3 years | 17 |
| 3 to less than 4 years | 12 |
| 4 to less than 5 years | 3 |
| 5 to less than 6 years | 3 |
| 6 to less than 7 years | 1 |
| 7 to less than 8 years | 1 |
| Undetermined | 1 |
| No non-parole period | 60 |
| Total | 119 |
Average total effective sentences of imprisonment and non-parole periods
Figure 7 represents the average total effective sentences and average non-parole periods each year for the 58 people who were sentenced to imprisonment for the principal offence of arson and who received a non-parole period that could be determined.
The average total effective sentence ranged from 2 years and 6 months in 2020-21 to 5 years and 3 months in 2018-19. Over the same period, the average non-parole period ranged from 1 year and 7 months in 2020-21 to 3 years and 4 months in 2018-19.
Figure 7: The average total effective sentence and non-parole period for people sentenced to imprisonment with a non-parole period for arson, by financial year
| Financial year | Number | Average total effective sentence | Average non-parole period |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-19 | 13 | 5 years and 3 months | 3 years and 4 months |
| 2019-20 | 9 | 3 years and 5 months | 2 years and 1 month |
| 2020-21 | 9 | 2 years and 6 months | 1 year and 7 months |
| 2021-22 | 16 | 3 years and 11 months | 2 years and 5 months |
| 2022-23 | 11 | 4 years and 2 months | 2 years and 9 months |
Other offences finalised at the same hearing
Sometimes people prosecuted for arson face multiple charges, which are finalised at the same hearing. This section looks at the range of offences that offenders were sentenced for alongside the principal offence of arson.
Figure 8 shows the number of people sentenced for the principal offence of arson by the total number of sentenced offences per person. The number of sentenced offences per person ranged from 1 to 25, and the median was 2 offences. There were 47 people (34.1%) sentenced for the single offence of arson. The average number of offences per person was 3.2.
Figure 8: The number of people sentenced for the principal offence of arson, by the number of sentenced offences per person, 2018-19 to 2022-23
| Number of offences | Number |
|---|---|
| 1 | 47 |
| 2 | 40 |
| 3 | 16 |
| 4 | 13 |
| 5-9 | 16 |
| 10-19 | 3 |
| 20+ | 3 |
| Total | 138 |
Table 3 shows the 10 most common offences co-sentenced alongside arson. The last column sets out the average number of offences sentenced per person. For example, 22 of the total 138 people (15.9%) were also sentenced for theft. On average, those 22 people were sentenced for 2.1 charges of theft per case.
Table 3: The number and percentage of people sentenced for the principal offence of arson, by the most common offences that were sentenced alongside arson, 2018-19 to 2022-23
| Offence | Number of cases | Percentage of cases | Average number of proven offences per case |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arson | 138 | 100.0% | 1.2 |
| Theft | 22 | 15.9% | 2.1 |
| Burglary | 20 | 14.5% | 2.1 |
| Commit an indictable offence while on bail | 18 | 13.0% | 1.1 |
| Intentionally destroy or damage property | 9 | 6.5% | 1.1 |
| Contravene a family violence intervention order intending to cause harm or fear | 7 | 5.1% | 1.0 |
| Contravene a family violence intervention order | 5 | 3.6% | 1.4 |
| Possess a drug of dependence | 5 | 3.6% | 1.4 |
| Aggravated burglary | 4 | 2.9% | 1.3 |
| Recklessly causing injury | 4 | 2.9% | 3.5 |
| Total | 138 | 100.0% | 3.2 |
Summary
From 2018-19 to 2022-23, 138 people were sentenced in the higher courts for the principal offence of arson. Of those 138 people, 119 (86.2%) received a principal sentence of imprisonment.
Total effective sentences of imprisonment ranged from 1 month to 11 years, and non-parole periods ranged from 10 months to 7 years. The median total effective sentence was 1 year and 9 months, while the median non-parole period was 2 years and 2 months.
On average, people sentenced for the principal offence of arson were sentenced for 3.2 offences each, with a maximum of 25 offences.
Further data on arson is available on SACStat.
Endnotes
1. This Sentencing Snapshot is an update of Sentencing Snapshot no. 276, which describes sentencing trends for arson between 2017 18 and 2021-22. This Snapshot does not include the offence of arson causing death: Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) s 197A.
2. Data on first-instance sentencing outcomes presented in this Snapshot was obtained from the Strategic Analysis and Review Team at Court Services Victoria. Data on appeal outcomes was collected by the Sentencing Advisory Council from the Australasian Legal Information Institute and was also provided by the Victorian Court of Appeal. The Sentencing Advisory Council regularly undertakes extensive quality control measures for current and historical data. While every effort is made to ensure that the data analysed in this Snapshot is accurate, the data is subject to revision.
3. Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) ss 197(4), (6) (7). The value of a penalty unit changes each year and can be found on the Council's website.
4. Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic) s 28, sch 2 cl 4.22.
5. If a person is sentenced for a case with a single charge, that offence is the principal offence. If a person is sentenced for more than one charge in a single case, the principal offence is the offence that attracted the most serious sentence according to the sentencing hierarchy.
6. Custodial and non-custodial supervision orders are not sentencing orders as they are imposed in cases in which the accused is found unfit to stand trial or not guilty because of mental impairment. However, they are mentioned in this Snapshot as they are an important form of disposition of criminal charges.
7. Immediate custodial sentences are mostly imprisonment, but they can also include partially suspended sentences, youth justice centre orders, hospital security orders, residential treatment orders, and combined custody and treatment orders.
8. For example, if the principal offence receives a combined order of imprisonment and a community correction order pursuant to section 44 of the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic), imprisonment is recorded as the principal sentence.
9. DPP v Lord [2018] VCC 1613; DPP v Tierney (a pseudonym) [2023] VCC 640.
10. A court may impose an aggregate sentence of imprisonment on multiple charges sentenced at the same time. These sentences are a single imprisonment term, but the sentences imposed on individual charges are not specified. A case may include a combination of aggregate and non-aggregate sentences.
11. DPP v Islam [2019] VCC 217 (arson with intent to endanger life).
12. DPP v Islam [2019] VCC 217 (arson with intent to endanger life).
13. 33 people were not eligible to have a non-parole period fixed because they were given a total effective sentence of less than 1 year.
14. 27 people were eligible to have a non-parole period fixed but did not receive one. This included 22 people who had an imprisonment length between 1 year and less than 2 years, and 5 people who had an imprisonment length of 2 years or more.
15. 1 person was given a non-parole period that related to more than 1 case (for example, they may have already been serving a prison sentence at the time). It was not possible to separately determine the non-parole periods that related to each individual case.
