Regina v Thuoc VAN HOANG [2002] NSWCCA 406

Regina v Thuoc VAN HOANG [2002] NSWCCA 406

The applicant was jointly liable for the whole of the victim's loss and the parity principle did not justify reducing the compensation order to half merely because no compensation order had been made against the co-offender. However, the original order for $6,500 exceeded the actual loss after recovered property was allowed for, and the correct amount was $5,400, so the compensation order had to be set aside and replaced.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 November 2002
Procedural Posture
Sentence Appeal Against Order for Compensation / Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; compensation order for $6,500 set aside and replaced with an order for $5,400.
Legal Topics
['break, Enter and Steal' 'compensation Order' 'joint and Several Liability of Co Offenders' 'parity Principle' 'sentence Appeal']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'victims Compensation'] ['break, Enter and Steal' 'compensation Order' 'joint and Several Liability of Co Offenders' 'parity Principle' 'sentence Appeal']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Sentence Appeal Against Order for Compensation / Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to appeal against the compensation order for $6,500.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to give reasons for refusing to apportion compensation between co-offenders.' "Whether the applicant should be liable for the whole of the victim's loss or only half because there was a co-offender." 'Whether the correct compensation amount was $5,400 rather than $6,500.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was jointly liable for the whole of the victim's loss and the parity principle did not justify reducing the compensation order to half merely because no compensation order had been made against the co-offender. However, the original order for $6,500 exceeded the actual loss after recovered property was allowed for, and the correct amount was $5,400, so the compensation order had to be set aside and replaced.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; compensation order for $6,500 set aside and replaced with an order for $5,400.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal against the order or direction for compensation for $6500 granted.' 'Appeal allowed; order for compensation set aside.' 'In lieu thereof the applicant is ordered to pay $5400 out of his property by way of compensation to You Ok Lee; such sum in the first instance to be paid to the Registrar,...