Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2011]JRC017

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

21^st January 2011

The Attorney General

-v-

Paul Robert Hartley

Daniel McIntyre

Ryan Francis Godel

Compensation Hearing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court after sentencing by the Inferior Number on 26^th March, 2010.  .

R. C. P. Pedley, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate J. N. Heywood for Hartley.

Advocate C. R. Baglin for McIntyre.

Advocate J. M. Grace for Godel.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        This matter comes back to Court today following the sentencing of Mr Hartley, Mr McIntyre and Mr Godel on 26^th March, 2010.  In his sentencing remarks the Bailiff added this :-

"We mentioned the question of Compensation Orders; you have caused loss to other people, much has been recovered but some has not.  Two of you have substantial savings and we see no reason why you should be entitled to keep these savings.  These savings should be given to those whom you have deprived of their goods and whom you have caused loss to.  So we are going to direct that there be an adjourned hearing for the Compensation Orders; the Crown must bring it back with reasonable despatch"

The Court went on to suggest amounts which might be paid for the time being.  I have to say that nearly ten months later this Court does not consider this matter has been brought back with reasonable despatch. 

2.        The Orders which we make are as follows. 

3.        In relation to Counts 5, 12 and 13 there are total claims of £689.25 and we understand that these are the Counts in respective of which Compensation Orders might be ordered against Mr Hartley and Mr McIntyre.  We order Mr Hartley to pay the sum of £389.25 in respect of those Counts and Mr McIntyre to pay the sum of £300 compensation in respect of those Counts, and those sums should be payable immediately.  The result, in so far as Mr McIntyre is concerned, is that if he has paid £800 to the Viscount, there is the sum of £500 which is due to be reimbursed to him. 

4.        In relation to Count 18 there is the claim from Mr and Mrs Cameron for loss of no claims bonus and in the sum of £133.05 and a ruined honeymoon in the sum of £3,339.58.  The nature of the claim is that the honeymoon was ruined following a phone call to confirm location and description of firearms held at the property and nature of injuries; "stress to myself and my wife whilst on honeymoon, unable to sleep and eat properly for the remainder of the trip.  My wife and I are still suffering severe anxiety".  The paperwork which has been put before us shows that the couple went on honeymoon on 5^th November and the Indictment would appear to indicate the offence was discovered on 12^th November.  Unfortunately we have been given very little information other than that but reaching a reasonable assumption that perhaps the couple were away for two weeks, there was at least one week and it may have been a little longer which was upset by knowledge of the break-ins which had taken place.  At all events the full cost of the honeymoon would not be appropriately the subject of a Compensation Order.  Taking all matters in the round the Court considers that the Compensation Order in favour of Mr and Mrs Cameron in respect of Count 18 should be in the sum of £633.05, that is the loss of no claims bonus and then £500 in respect of the honeymoon, and we allocate that £300 due by Mr Godel, treating him and Mr McIntyre equally as the Crown has suggested, and £333.05 due by Mr Hartley. 

5.        Mr Hartley therefore has a total of compensation to pay of £722.30 and the balance which he has paid to the Viscount can be returned to him.  The monies are due immediately obviously. 

6.        In relation to Mr Godel, £300 compensation is to be paid by 1^st March and there will be 3 weeks' imprisonment in default of payment. 

Authorities

AG-v-Hartley and Others [2010] JRC 065.