R v Meakin (No. 4)

The matter before the court involved an application for victim compensation under the Victims Rights and Support Act 2013. The applicant, the parents of the deceased, sought compensation for the funeral expenses, loss of wages and other out-of-pocket expenses incurred following their daughter's death by being run over by a van. The defendant, Meakin, was found guilty of murder and sentenced to imprisonment. Meakin argued that his impecuniosity should be a relevant consideration in the amount of compensation awarded. The court was required to decide whether the impecuniosity of the defendant was a relevant consideration in determining the amount of compensation for victims of crime under the Victims Rights and Support Act 2013.

The court held that the impecuniosity of the defendant was not a relevant consideration in determining the amount of compensation to be awarded to the victims. The court found that the primary purpose of the Act was to provide support and assistance to victims of crime, and the impecuniosity of the offender did not affect the victims' entitlement to compensation. The court noted that the amount of compensation should be based on the losses suffered by the victims and the degree of fault of the offender. The court also held that the provisions of the Act did not preclude the court from taking into account the impecuniosity of the offender in sentencing, but it did not affect the victims' entitlement to compensation.

The court ordered that the applicant be awarded compensation in the amount of $40,000 for funeral expenses, $20,000 for loss of wages and $5,000 for other out-of-pocket expenses, totalling $65,000. The court held that the defendant's impecuniosity was not a relevant consideration in determining the amount of compensation to be awarded. The court emphasised that the primary purpose of the Victims Rights and Support Act 2013 was to provide support and assistance to victims of crime, and the impecuniosity of the offender did not affect the victims' entitlement to compensation. The court also noted that the provisions of the Act did not preclude the court from taking into account the impecuniosity of the offender in sentencing, but it did not affect the victims' entitlement to compensation. The court ordered that the defendant pay the compensation to the applicant within 28 days of the judgment.