And there are more key cases ahead for the ACT Court of Appeal, with the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions seeking more jail time for two child abusers - Aaron James Holliday and former representative cricketer Ian Harold King.

The Canberra Times has studied the appeal court's published criminal judgments from the past two years, as well as some unpublished decisions.

Of 22 appeals against ACT Supreme Court judges' sentences launched by either side, seven were instigated by prosecutors and six of those involved sex crimes.

Director of Public Prosecutions Jon White said, ''More and more of these cases are coming before the courts unfortunately, so it's really timely that some guidance be given by the Court of Appeal to sentencing judges.'' He said Crown sentence appeals were lodged only in exceptional cases when key principles were at stake.

''I think it's fair to say that in the last year or so we have taken a number of appeals in that area [sexual offences], and in a number of instances the court has upheld our appeal and increased the sentences in this area,'' he said.

Four of those six sexual offence appeals were upheld.

In one unsuccessful Crown appeal the judges agreed the weekend jail term given to a man who filmed a girl getting out of the shower was too soft, but were unwilling to overturn the sentence because he had already done most of his time.

The appeals occurred against a backdrop of legislative reform and the creation of a dedicated sexual assault prosecution team, in a bid to improve the way the justice system deals with such cases.

''It's no secret we've been trying to pay more attention to the prosecution of sexual offences within the office, and as part of that we have concentrated on identifying any sentences which might be properly the subject of an appeal in accordance with those principles I outlined,'' he said.

Each appeal involved different facts and different points of law, but in all six the Crown argued the sentences imposed were ''manifestly inadequate''.

In most cases the appeal judges agreed.

Last week the court dismissed a Crown appeal against the seven-year sentence of sex attacker Craig Paul Meyboom, who is due for parole later this year, with their reasons yet to be published.

But earlier this year the court agreed that serial rapist Alfred Chatfield's five-year jail term for attacking a woman on Northbourne Avenue did not reflect his culpability and ''atrocious'' criminal record, and added another two years and three months.

A man who used young children, including his one-year-old son, to produce pornography had his seven-year sentence increased to nine years and seven months.

Judges ruled weekend jail for Michael Stanley Cooper, a man who amassed the largest collection of child pornography seized in Canberra, was too lenient but declined to send him behind bars full time.

And the court ruled four-and-a-half years for child abuser Benjamin John Eisenach ''requires appellate intervention'', stretching it to eight years.

The as-yet-unheard Holliday and King appeals loom large.

Holliday is serving 16 years for ''sinister'' child abuse offences, including creating so-called training documents that purportedly taught the boys how to help police catch paedophiles in a fictitious ''operation paedobait''. The Crown has appealed against the sentence, as has Holliday.

And earlier this year former Queensland fast bowler King was given 12 years after pleading guilty to 25 charges against five young boys.

The Holliday appeal is listed for November but the King case is unlikely to be heard until next year.