Selected Cases

The following is a selection of publicly available cases in which Sherwood Du, Principal Solicitor of Nicodemus Lawyers, has appeared as Instructing Solicitor or Solicitor Advocate. Many of our strongest results are the least visible: charges withdrawn or struck out, matters resolved without conviction, suppressed decisions, and Magistrates' Court outcomes — including Diversion matters — are not ordinarily published. Even in the higher courts, sentencing remarks are published only in a small minority of cases, so most sentencing outcomes never appear on public databases. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes; every matter turns on its own facts.

The Matter o f Sze [2016]: Acted for the Accused in relation to an alleged 90kg methylamphetamine drug importation.

Mr Tim Au v Sing Tao Newspapers Pty Ltd [2017] FWC 1303: Acted for the Respondent. Application for relief from unfair dismissal – jurisdictional objection to Application by Respondent – whether Applicant’s dismissal a case of genuine redundancy – finding on a narrow basis, that the dismissal was not a genuine redundancy – further proceedings ordered.

Junus v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd; Junus v Sing Tao Newspa pers Pty Ltd [20 18] NSWSC 1735: Acted for the Second Defendant. In each proceeding, imputations (a), (b), (e), (f) and (g) are struck out with leave to replead; costs are reserved until the next occasion; leave is granted to the Plaintiff to file any Amended Statement of Claim on or before 23 November; both matters adjourned to 30 November 2018.

Chen v Commissioner of the Australian Fed eral Police [2017] F CA 1558: Acted for the Prospective Applicant. Prospective challenge to search warrants issued under s 3E of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) – sufficiency of information before the issuing officer –issuing Magistrate’s satisfaction that there were reasonable grounds for suspecting that there would be evidence of the offence of having dealt with property reasonably suspected of being proceeds of crime, contrary to s 400.9(1) of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth).

Director of Public Prosec utions v Wan [2019] VCC 1 112: Acted for the Accused. 1 charge of culpable driving causing death pursuant to Section 318 of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic). Offence punishable by a maximum of 20 years imprisonment. Early Plea of Guilty accompanied with remorse. Sentenced to imprisonment for 8 years with a non-parole period of 5 and 1/2 years. The Court noted that but for the plea, the Accused would have been sentenced to 9 years imprisonment, with a non-parole of 6 years.

Director of Public Prosecuti ons v Lu [2021] VCC 1 148: Acted for the Accused. 1 charge of kidnapping – 22-year-old female offender whose role was to lure the victim so that he could be kidnapped by the principal offenders – financial motive for offending – offender is a Chinese national who had been in Australia for approximately five years on a student visa – no prior offending – plea of guilty – assistance by offender to law enforcement authorities – risk of deportation. Sentence: 18 months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 9 months. The Court noted that but for the plea, the Accused would have been sentenced to 2 years and 6 months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 2 years.

Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v John Bowen (a p seudonym) [202 1] VCC 1492: Acted for the Accused. Importing tobacco products with the intention of defrauding the revenue (one count) – Commonwealth Offence – total duty evaded $1,640,578.74 – no prior criminal history – plea of guilty during the currency of the pandemic – possibility of deportation at the conclusion of sentence – significant but not principal role in the importation – reasonable prospects of rehabilitation. Sentenced to be imprisoned for 26 months with a non-parole period of 16 months upon entering a Recognizance Release Order in the amount of $1,500.00, to be of good behaviour for a period of two years. The Court noted that but for the plea, the Accused would have been sentenced to 2 years and 10 months imprisonment, with a 2 year non-parole period before being released upon a Recognizance Release Order in the sum of $1,500.00, to be of good behaviour for a period of three years.

RSPCA (Vic) v X (a pseudon ym) [202 2] MMC (14 February 2022), MCC (1 June 2022): Acted for the Accused for unreasonably failing to provide treatment to a sick animal, and aggravated cruelty causing death. Psychiatric material tendered. The Presiding Magistrate noted that had the Accused not entered a guilty plea, the Accused would have been sentenced to two months imprisonment. On Appeal, reduced a fine of $32,000 to $15,000.

Director of Public Prosecutions v H uang [2022] VCC 222 6: Acted for the Accused. 2 charges of negligently causing serious injury – Driving on the wrong side of the road – Gravity of offending – Moral culpability – Remorse – Good character – Punishment – General deterrence – Denunciation – Expectations of the community of drivers. Each offence punishable by a maximum of 10 years. Total effective sentence of 2 years and 8 months with a minimum non-parole period of 14 months and all licences are cancelled and disqualified from driving for a period of 2 years. The Court noted that but for the plea, the Accused would have been sentenced to 5 years and with a non-parole period of 3 years.

Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Di Sanh Duon g [2024] VCC 182: Acted for the Accused, Mr Sunny Duong. This was Australia's first foreign interference national security test case. The offence carries a maximum sentence of imprisonment of 10 years. Mr Duong received a combination sentence of 2 years and 9 months, immediate release after serving 12 months upon signing a Recognizance Release Order that is in effect for 4 years in the sum of $3,000.

Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth ) v Boon Bing Koo [20 24] VCC 1995: Acted for the Accused. One indictable charge (Charge 1) of attempting to possess a commercial quantity of an unlawfully imported border controlled drug (methamphetamine) – 662.9 times commercial quantity – role of unpacking, repacking and loading consignment on one day only with recklessness as to it containing illicit drugs and driving reloaded boxes from consignment to another destination. Total effective sentence of five and a half years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years. A co-accused in this matter received a total effective sentence of eleven years’ imprisonment with a non-parole period of seven and a half years.

Director of Public Prosecutio ns (Cth) v Huang [2025] VCC 12 10: Acted for the Accused on a plea to Commonwealth wildlife export offences involving 27 native reptiles, securing findings of genuine remorse, cooperation and low reoffending risk, with a total effective sentence of 2 years and 10 months' imprisonment and release on recognizance after 12 months.

Supreme Court of Victoria (Court of Appeal) [2025]: Achieved a successful appeal against conviction, successfully arguing fairness principles in the interests of justice. Citation withheld pending conclusion of related proceedings.

Huang v Director of Public Prosecutio ns (Cth) [2026 ] VSCA 194: The first Victorian appellate consideration of sentencing under the wildlife export provisions of the EPBC Act. While leave was refused, the Court accepted the applicant's genuine remorse, cooperation with authorities, and strong prospects of rehabilitation.