section 741.2


A restitution order does not affect a victims ability to seek a civil remedy.


741.2 A civil remedy for an act or omission is not affected by reason only that an order for restitution under section 738 or 739 has been made in respect of that act or omission.


Section 741.2 of the Criminal Code of Canada clarifies that a civil remedy is not affected by an order of restitution that may have been made in relation to the act or omission in question. This section serves as a protective measure for victims of criminal acts, allowing them to pursue separate civil remedies for damages and losses suffered as a result of the crime, even if a court has ordered the offender to make restitution. In essence, this section affirms that orders for restitution under sections 738 and 739 of the Criminal Code, which allow courts to require offenders to compensate victims for losses or damage caused by their offenses, should not be seen as a substitute for civil remedies. Restitution orders are made as part of the criminal justice process and are designed to hold offenders accountable for their actions, but they do not necessarily cover all of the harm caused by the crime. Civil remedies, on the other hand, can provide victims with additional avenues for redress, including compensation for pain and suffering, loss of income, or other costs related to the crime. By explicitly stating that an order for restitution does not affect a victim's right to pursue civil remedies, section 741.2 helps to ensure that victims have access to a full range of legal options for seeking justice and compensation in the wake of a criminal act. It also underscores the distinction between criminal and civil law and the different objectives and remedies that are available under each system. Ultimately, this section helps to promote a more comprehensive and victim-centered approach to addressing the impacts of criminal behavior.


Section 741.2 of the Criminal Code of Canada provides clarity on the interaction between criminal and civil remedies in cases where restitution orders have been issued. The section establishes that the issuance of a restitution order as a criminal remedy does not affect the right of an individual or entity to pursue civil remedies for the same act or omission. The purpose of this provision is to ensure that individuals or entities who have suffered harm as a result of criminal behavior are not limited in their ability to seek compensation by a restitution order issued under criminal law. Restitution orders are intended to require offenders to compensate their victims for losses resulting from criminal behavior; however, these orders may not fully address the extent of the harm suffered or compensate for intangible losses such as pain and suffering or emotional distress. By clarifying that a restitution order does not prevent civil remedies, victims are provided with additional avenues to seek compensation to address their full range of losses. The provision recognizes that criminal and civil law serve distinct but complementary purposes. Criminal law seeks to hold perpetrators accountable for their actions and punish them for violating societal norms, while civil law focuses on compensating individuals for harm suffered and restoring them to their pre-loss position. Criminal law can provide consequences for actions, but it may not fully address the harm suffered by victims. Civil law can assist in compensating victims for lost income, wages or property damage, but it is often unable to restore the victim to their pre-loss position. The importance of this provision was demonstrated in the case of R. v. Walsh, [2002] S.C.J. No. 11, where the court held that a restitution order did not prevent the victim from pursuing a separate civil action against the offender. In this case, the respondent was convicted of criminal harassment and received a restitution order for the victim. However, the victim also pursued a civil action against the respondent for damages related to the harassment. The court found that the two remedies were distinct and that the restitution order did not preclude the victim from pursuing civil action for additional damages. Moreover, victims may have different motivations for pursuing criminal and civil remedies. While criminal prosecution may serve as a means of vindicating societal values and punishing wrongdoers, civil actions may be motivated by a desire to hold individuals accountable for their actions, obtain compensation for losses suffered, or to prevent similar conduct in the future. Thus, this provision recognizes that the decision to pursue criminal remedies, including restitution orders, does not compromise or limit the right of individuals to pursue other available remedies for the same act or omission. In conclusion, Section 741.2 of the Criminal Code of Canada is a critical provision that ensures that victims of criminal behavior can still seek civil remedies even after receiving restitution orders. The provision clarifies the relationship between criminal and civil remedies and assures that individuals or entities who have suffered harm can seek full compensation for their losses. The provision aligns with the principles of justice, accountability, and fairness by providing victims of criminal acts with multiple available remedies to address the harm suffered.


Section 741.2 of the Criminal Code of Canada establishes that a civil remedy for an act or omission is not affected by an order for restitution under section 738 or 739. This means that victims of a criminal offense may still pursue civil action against the offender even if restitution has already been awarded by the court. This provision aims to ensure that victims of crime have access to multiple avenues of redress and that they are not limited by the outcomes of criminal proceedings. The provision of section 741.2 has important strategic considerations in the context of criminal and civil litigation. One such consideration is the timing of initiating civil proceedings. Although a victim can pursue both criminal restitution and civil remedy, civil litigation may be more effective in certain situations. For instance, if the criminal restitution ordered by the court is not sufficient to compensate the victim fully, they may wish to pursue further damages in civil court. Alternatively, if the offender's conviction is uncertain, the victim may wish to delay initiating civil proceedings until the criminal case has been resolved to establish the underlying conduct. Another factor to consider is the standard of proof required by civil court. Criminal proceedings require proof beyond a reasonable doubt to establish guilt and obtain restitution. Civil proceedings, on the other hand, adopt a lower standard of proof, which is the balance of probabilities. This means that the victim may have a higher chance of success in obtaining damages in civil court where the evidence may not be as strong as required in criminal court. Furthermore, the victim can recover different types of damages in civil court compared to restitution ordered by the criminal court. In civil court, the victim can seek compensation for various types of damages such as pain and suffering, loss of income, and punitive damages, which are not available under criminal restitution. To employ effective strategies when dealing with section 741.2 of the Criminal Code, individuals or organizations should consider engaging the services of skilled and experienced lawyers. The lawyers can help victims to navigate the complexities of the criminal justice and civil litigation process effectively. They can provide legal advice on the timing and optimal strategies for initiating civil litigation. They can also conduct thorough investigations to build a strong case and negotiate with offenders or their insurers for a settlement when appropriate. In conclusion, section 741.2 of the Criminal Code of Canada ensures that the order for restitution for a criminal offense does not affect a victim's right to pursue civil remedies. The provision creates opportunities for victims to seek further compensation if the restitution awarded is not sufficient, or the offender's conviction is uncertain. Effective strategies that could be employed when dealing with this section include engaging the services of skilled and experienced legal experts, considering the optimal timing for initiating civil proceedings, and seeking different types of damages available under civil court.