R v Schultz [2022] NSWDC 63

R v Schultz [2022] NSWDC 63

The entities did not suffer compensable loss through or by reason of the offences, as the work for which payment was made was performed to the required standard, and thus the causal connection required for a compensation order was not established; therefore, the Crown's application is refused.

Parties
Applicant: Regina (Crown); Respondent: Timothy Leslie Schultz
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Compensation Orders After Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Application for compensation refused
Legal Topics
Compensation Orders, Victims Rights and Support Act 2013, Corporation as Aggrieved Person, Dishonestly Obtain Financial Advantage by Deception

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina (Crown)

Applicant

Timothy Leslie Schultz

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Application for Compensation Orders After Conviction and Sentence

  1. 1 Does 'person' in the Victims Rights and Support Act 2013 include corporations?
  2. 2 Are any of the applying entities corporations as defined under s 57A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)?
  3. 3 Have the aggrieved persons suffered loss through or by reason of the offences?

Ratio Decidendi

The entities did not suffer compensable loss through or by reason of the offences, as the work for which payment was made was performed to the required standard, and thus the causal connection required for a compensation order was not established; therefore, the Crown's application is refused.

Court Disposition

Application for compensation refused

Orders

  • I refuse to make the orders for compensation sought by the Crown.