Criminal Code of Canada - section 689(2) - Annulling or varying order

section 689(2)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

The court of appeal can change a compensation or restitution order made by the trial court within the prescribed limits, even if the conviction is not overturned.

SECTION WORDING

689(2) The court of appeal may by order annul or vary an order made by the trial court with respect to compensation or the restitution of property within the limits prescribed by the provision under which the order was made by the trial court, whether or not the conviction is quashed.

EXPLANATION

Section 689(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada gives the court of appeal the power to modify orders made by a trial court relating to compensation or restitution of property. This provision gives the courts the ability to correct any errors or omissions made by the trial court when making an order for compensation or restitution. An order for compensation may be made where a person has suffered a loss or damage as a result of a criminal offence. In such cases, the trial court may order the offender to pay compensation to the victim. Similarly, an order for the restitution of property may be made where property has been taken or damaged as a result of a criminal offence. Section 689(2) ensures that the court of appeal has the power to correct any errors or omissions made by the trial court when making orders for compensation or restitution. The court of appeal's power to vary or annul such orders is limited to the limits prescribed by the provision under which the trial court made the order. This provision is important as it protects the rights of the victim and ensures that the offender is held accountable for their actions. It also provides a mechanism for correcting any errors made by the trial court in making orders for compensation or restitution. Overall, Section 689(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada plays an important role in ensuring that the criminal justice system operates fairly and justly, and that the rights of both victims and offenders are protected.

COMMENTARY

Section 689(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that empowers the court of appeal to intervene in the orders made by a trial court relating to the compensation or restitution of property. The provision is an important component of the Criminal Code of Canada as it ensures that the victims of a crime are compensated for the loss incurred and the property taken by the offender. The provision also helps in the proper administration of justice by ensuring that the trial court's ruling is reviewed and evaluated by an appellate court. The provision gives the court of appeal the power to annul or vary the compensation or restitution order made by the trial court. This means that if the court of appeal finds that the trial court's ruling was unfair or did not meet the requirements of the provision, it can change or cancel the order. Additionally, this provision allows the court of appeal to review the orders made by the trial court on its own motion, even if the case is not under appeal. One of the core benefits of Section 689(2) is that it provides a victim of a crime with some sense of justice by ensuring that they are compensated for the damages provisionally. The ability for the court of appeal to intervene helps victims feel like they were not left alone, and that justice has been done when the trial court renders an order for compensation or restitution, which is then upheld by the Court of Appeals. Furthermore, equally important, this provision also assists the court of appeal to ensure that the decisions made by the trial court are fair, just, and accountable. The power to review the orders affirms the principle of accountability and ensures that the judicial system remains transparent and accessible to all parties involved. However, the provision may also have some drawbacks. One of these is that the court of appeal may not always prioritize the compensation or restitution of the victim, depending on other legal considerations that may be at play. Therefore, some victims may feel as though their right to compensation has been sacrificed in the interest of other legal considerations. Another weakness of this provision arises in cases where the offender does not have the means to pay the compensation ordered. In such cases, the victim may not receive any compensation even if the trial court orders one. While it may not be directly due to the provisions of Section 689(2), this is an issue often encountered in the course of implementing the law, causing cases of the justice system falling short for the victim. In conclusion, Section 689(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that empowers the court of appeal to intervene in the orders made by a trial court regarding compensation or the restitution of property. This provision ensures that the victim is compensated according to the law, and that the trial court makes fair and accountable decisions. However, some limitations of Section 689(2) remain, needing due consideration by legislators and courts.

STRATEGY

Section 689(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides the court of appeal with the power to either annul or vary an order made by the trial court with respect to compensation or the restitution of property within the limits prescribed by the provision under which the order was made, regardless of whether or not the conviction is quashed. This section, therefore, has significant implications for both the prosecution and the defense in criminal cases. One of the strategic considerations for the prosecution when dealing with this section is to ensure that they make a strong case for compensation or restitution at the trial stage. If the prosecution obtains a favorable order for compensation or restitution at trial, they must be prepared to defend it before the court of appeal, who has the power to vary or annul the order. The prosecution may, therefore, decide to employ a legal strategy that involves presenting strong evidence to support any claim for compensation or restitution. They may also decide to use legal precedents that provide clear and convincing arguments in support of their position. Another strategic consideration for the prosecution when dealing with Section 689(2) is to ensure that they keep well-documented evidence showing all of the losses suffered by the victim. Criminal trials may involve complex evidence, and the prosecution must be able to provide a detailed account of the harm caused by the crime. This evidence may include medical reports, witness statements, and police reports. The prosecution must be careful to ensure that this evidence is filed in a timely manner and that it is presented to the court in a clear and comprehensive manner. For the defense, the strategic consideration when dealing with Section 689(2) is to minimize any orders for compensation or restitution at the trial stage. The defense may employ a legal strategy that involves presenting mitigating evidence that shows the offender's lack of intent or any mitigating factors that reduce the harm caused by the crime. The defense may also challenge the prosecution's evidence and seek to undermine their case for compensation or restitution. Another strategy that the defense may employ is to negotiate with the prosecution regarding orders for compensation or restitution. If the defense believes that the prosecution's case for compensation or restitution is strong, they may choose to negotiate with the prosecution to reach a settlement. In this case, the defense may be able to obtain a more favorable outcome for their client, such as a reduced order for compensation or restitution. In conclusion, Section 689(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada has significant implications for both the prosecution and the defense in criminal cases. Both sides must be prepared to present a strong case for or against any orders for compensation or restitution at the trial stage. They must also be prepared to defend their positions before the court of appeal, who has the power to vary or annul any orders made by the trial court. The successful party will need to ensure that they take all necessary steps to present a clear and compelling case.