ARF v Victims Compensation Fund Corporation

Case [2013] NSWADT 241


Administrative Decisions Tribunal


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: ARF v Victims Compensation Fund Corporation. [2013] NSWADT 241
Hearing dates:On the papers
Decision date: 29 October 2013
Jurisdiction:Victims Support Division
Before: P H Molony, Judicial Member
Decision:

1, Leave to lodge an appeal out of time with respect to claim 112481 is refused.

2. The notice of appeal with respect to claims 112483 and 119432 is dismissed for want of jurisdiction

Catchwords: Victim Support and Rehabilitation - application for leave to lodge an appeal out of time - leave refused - jurisdiction
Legislation Cited: Victim Support and Rehabilitation Act 1996
Victims Rights and Support Act 2013
Cases Cited: Foulkes v Victims Compensation Fund Corporation
Yacoub v Pilkington (Australia) Limited (2007) NSWCA 290
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: ARF (Applicant)
Victims Compensation Fund (Respondent)
File Number(s):137014
Publication restriction:s 126 of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Act 1997 applies

reasons for decision

Background

  1. ARF sought to appeal three determinations made by a Compensation Assessor on 20 June 2008 dismissing claims for victims' compensation brought by him. Those three determinations related to acts of violence being:

  • A home invasion and assault on 25 and 26 Februarys 2004 (claim 112481).
  • An assault at bus stop on 15 February 2004 (claim 112483).
  • An assault with brake and enter on 25 October 2004 (claim 119432).

In each case the Compensation Assessor was not satisfied that ARF had demonstrated an act of violence as he contended.

  1. ARF subsequently appealed to the Victims Compensation Tribunal (VCT) against the decisions with respect to claims 112483 and 119432. On 21 August 2008 the VCT dismissed his appeal with respect to claim 112483. The VCT awarded him victims compensation of $8,010 with respect to claim 119432, but the whole of that amount was set-off against a previous restitution order made against ARF in accordance with s 31 of the Victims Support and Rehabilitation Act 1996 (the old Act).

  1. On 12 October 2012 ARF filed a notice of appeal with the VCT in which he sought to appeal, "all the cases I made a claim for." He attached a discharge summary from John Hunter Hospital with respect to treatment he received following an assault on 5 October 2012 (the discharge summary). On the document ARF had written -

Like legal action taken on this assault to (sic) please. No legal representation.
  1. On 29 October 2012 the VCT wrote to him advising that he had previously appealed the decisions with respect to claims 112483 and 119432. If he was dissatisfied with the result his remedy was an appeal to the District Court under s 39 of the old Act.

  1. On 26 October 2012 the Registrar of the VCT wrote to ARF regarding claim 112481 acknowledging receipt of the appeal and advising he would need to provide, "submissions in relation to exceptional circumstances for lodging the appeal out of time" by 22 November 2012. He was also sent a copy of the VCT's information sheet entitled, "Leave to appeal out of time."…

Continue reading ARF v Victims Compensation Fund Corporation

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
ARF v Victims Compensation Fund Corporation [2013] NSWADT 241
Case
[2013] NSWADT 241
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the court involved the Australian Repatriation Fund (ARF) and the Victims Compensation Fund Corporation. The ARF sought leave to appeal out of time in relation to three claims, two of which were dismissed for want of jurisdiction, while the appeal regarding the first claim was denied for refusal of leave. The dispute centred on victim support and rehabilitation benefits under the Victims Compensation Fund Corporation Act 1992 (Cth). The ARF argued that it was entitled to certain payments from the Victims Compensation Fund Corporation, which it claimed were not paid despite the fund being available. The primary legal issue before the court was whether the ARF had the right to appeal out of time and whether the court had jurisdiction to hear the appeal in relation to the claims in question. The court determined that the ARF's application for leave to appeal out of time was not justified, as there was no evidence of exceptional circumstances warranting such leave. Additionally, the court held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal concerning claims 112483 and 119432, as these claims were outside the scope of the court's original jurisdiction. Consequently, the court refused leave to lodge an appeal out of time with respect to claim 112481 and dismissed the notice of appeal for claims 112483 and 119432 for want of jurisdiction.

Orders

Orders of the court

1, Leave to lodge an appeal out of time with respect to claim 112481 is refused.

2. The notice of appeal with respect to claims 112483 and 119432 is dismissed for want of jurisdiction

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.