ADR v FDW; FDL v FDW

Case [2008] QSC 260


SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

ADR v FDW; FDL v FDW [2008] QSC 260

PARTIES:

ADR
(applicant)
v
FDW
(respondent)

FDL
(applicant)
v
FDW
(respondent)

FILE NOS:

No 14 of 2008
No 15 of 2008

DIVISION:

Trial Division

PROCEEDING:

Application for Criminal Compensation

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court, Maryborough

DELIVERED ON:

24 October 2008

DELIVERED AT:

Maryborough

HEARING DATE:

17 October 2008

JUDGE:

Lyons J

ORDER:

  1. That the respondent being a person convicted of indictable personal offence pay compensation to FDL in the sum of $9,000 for the injuries suffered by him because of the offence.
  2. That the amount awarded be paid to the Public Trustee who shall hold the moneys as a separate trust fund on trust for FDL.
  3. That the respondent being a person convicted of indictable personal offence pay compensation to ADR in the sum of $9,000 for the injuries suffered by him because of the offence.

4.   That the amount awarded be paid to the Public Trustee who shall hold the moneys as a separate trust fund on trust for ADR.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – ORDERS FOR COMPENSATION, REPARATION, RESTITUTION, FORFEITURE AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY – COMPENSATION – QUEENSLAND – the respondent pleaded guilty to two counts of attempting to unlawfully kill the applicants – the applicants seek criminal compensation from the respondent – the applicants suffered moderate mental or nervous shock – where there was more than one cause of injury – whether the respondent’s behaviour directly or indirectly contributed to the injury


Criminal Offence Victims Act
1995 (Qld), s 5, s19, s 20, s 21, s 22, s 24, s 25

R v Kazakoff; ex parte Ferguson[2000] QSC 156; [2001] 2 Qd R 320, cited
Summers v Dougherty & Anor[2000] QSC 365, cited

COUNSEL:

PJ Pagliorino (sol.) for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Carswell & Co Solicitors for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent

LYONS J:

  1. In April 2005 the respondent took his two sons then aged five and four and put them in his car.  He took them to buy a garden hose, then drove them to a secluded area and attached the hose to the exhaust of the vehicle.  He subsequently started the ignition of the vehicle and set about killing himself and the boys by carbon monoxide poisoning.  After a period of time however, he turned off the engine and then took the children to hospital for medical help.[1]  Whilst the children were exposed to carbon monoxide for an extended period they have survived.  The long term effects of the poisoning however are not known. 

    [1]Sentencing remarks, Byrne J, 12 September 2005, p 1.

  1. On 12 September 2005, the respondent pleaded guilty to two counts of attempting to unlawfully kill and in respect of each count he was sentenced to imprisonment for five years, with a recommendation for post-prison community based release after serving 18 months.  One hundred and fifty-seven days…

Continue reading ADR v FDW; FDL v FDW

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
ADR v FDW; FDL v FDW [2008] QSC 260
Case
[2008] QSC 260
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicants, ADR and FDL, have brought an action against the respondent, FDW, following the respondent's conviction for two counts of attempting to unlawfully kill the applicants. The applicants seek compensation for the injuries they suffered, which they claim were caused by the respondent's actions. The respondents were convicted in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The primary legal issue before the court was whether the respondent's actions directly or indirectly contributed to the applicants' injuries, given that there were multiple causes of their injuries.

The court considered the statutory provisions governing compensation orders for victims of crime in Queensland. The court held that the respondent's actions were a significant contributing factor to the applicants' injuries. The court found that the applicants suffered moderate mental or nervous shock as a result of the respondent's actions, which was a direct consequence of the offence committed against them. The court also noted that the applicants' injuries were not solely attributable to other causes, and that the respondent's actions played a significant role in causing the injuries.

In light of the above, the court made an order that the respondent pay compensation to each of the applicants in the sum of $9,000 for the injuries suffered because of the offence. The court also ordered that the compensation be paid to the Public Trustee who shall hold the moneys as a separate trust fund on trust for the applicants.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. That the respondent being a person convicted of indictable personal offence pay compensation to FDL in the sum of $9,000 for the injuries suffered by him because of the offence.

2. That the amount awarded be paid to the Public Trustee who shall hold the moneys as a separate trust fund on trust for FDL.

3. That the respondent being a person convicted of indictable personal offence pay compensation to ADR in the sum of $9,000 for the injuries suffered by him because of the offence.

4. That the amount awarded be paid to the Public Trustee who shall hold the moneys as a separate trust fund on trust for ADR.

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.