DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
Addley v Tago [2011] QDC 98
PARTIES:
TRACEY ANN ADDLEY
(Applicant)
v
SO’O TAGO
(Respondent)
FILE NO/S:
124/2009
DIVISION:
Civil
PROCEEDING:
Application for Criminal Compensation
ORIGINATING COURT:
Beenleigh
DELIVERED ON:
9 June, 2011
DELIVERED AT:
Kingaroy
HEARING DATE:
16 May 2011
JUDGE:
Dearden DCJ
ORDER:
The respondent So’o Tago pay the applicant Tracey Ann Addley the sum of $39,000
CATCHWORDS:
Application – criminal compensation – grievous bodily harm – facial fracture – fractured jaw – dental injury – mental or nervous shock
LEGISLATION:
Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld) ss. 24 & 25(7)
Victims of Crimes Assistance Act 2009 (Qld) s.167(2)
CASES:
COUNSEL:
D J Gilmore (solicitor) for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent
SOLICITORS:
D J Gilmore & Associates, solicitors for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent
Introduction
The respondent So’o Tago pleaded guilty in the Beenleigh District Court on 28 August 2007 to one count of grievous bodily harm in respect of the applicant Tracey Ann Addley. The respondent was sentenced by me to three years imprisonment, suspended after serving nine months, with an operational period of four years.
Facts
On 7 August 2005 the applicant went to the respondent’s house to visit his 21 year old niece with whom she was friends. The respondent arrived home at about 11.00 pm and the applicant and the respondent’s niece was sitting on the bed talking. Once the respondent’s niece saw the respondent, she left the bedroom and returned to her own room.
The respondent came into the room where the applicant was sitting and proceeded to call her a “bitch”. The applicant said that she noticed that the respondent’s eyes were red and that he smelt of alcohol. The respondent grabbed the applicant by her hair and then proceeded to hit the right side of her face. The applicant was terrified and tried to cover her face. The applicant heard a cracking sound in her jaw and felt immediate pain. The respondent has a steel metal plate in his left arm and used both arms when he hit the applicant several times.
The applicant said that she could taste blood in her mouth and that she thought she was going to vomit. The applicant said that once the respondent left the room, she went to the bathroom and saw that her two front teeth were smashed into her bottom gum. The applicant’s jaw was broken as a result of the assault.[1]
[1] Exhibit KR4 (Schedule of Facts), p. 1, Affidavit of Karl Robinson sworn 21 August 2009.
Injuries
The applicant was x-rayed in respect of the injuries. The applicant suffered a fractured jaw. On 14 August 2005 the applicant attended the Brisbane Women’s Hospital where on 16 August, 2005, she underwent surgery on her face, involving the insertion of two metal plates into her chin. The applicant was required to wear a neck brace.[2]
[2] Exhibit KR4, (Schedule of Facts), p. 1, Exhibit KR5,…
Continue reading Addley v Tago
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Addley v Tago [2011] QDC 98
- Case
- [2011] QDC 98
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court examined the extent and severity of the injuries, along with the impact on the applicant’s quality of life. The injuries included a fractured facial bone, a fractured jaw, dental damage, and significant psychological trauma. The court took into account the nature of the injuries, the treatment required, and the long-term effects, including the potential need for further dental work and psychological therapy. Given the severity and the lasting consequences of the injuries, the court concluded that the applicant was entitled to substantial compensation. The court found that the appropriate amount of compensation to be awarded was $39,000. This sum was deemed adequate to cover the medical costs, lost earnings, and the impact on the applicant’s mental health and overall wellbeing.
Orders
Orders of the court
The respondent So’o Tago pay the applicant Tracey Ann Addley the sum of $39,000
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.