Chong v Chong

Case [2010] QDC 530


DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Chong v Chong [2010] QDC 530

PARTIES:

KAREN LEE CHONG
applicant

v

DORAMIE GRACE CHONG
respondent

FILE NO/S:

38/2009

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Application for criminal compensation

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court, Mt Isa

DELIVERED ON:

17 December 2010

DELIVERED AT:

Mt Isa

HEARING DATE:

17 December 2010

JUDGE:

Dearden DCJ

ORDER:

The respondent Doramie Grace Chong pay the applicant Karen Lee Chong the sum of $21,000.

CATCHWORDS:

LEGISLATION:

CASES:

APPLICATION – CRIMINAL COMPENSATION – unlawful wounding – gunshot/stab wound – mental or nervous shock

Criminal Offence Victims Act1995 (Qld) s.25(7).

Victims of Crime Assistance Act 2009 (Qld)

Kennedy v Faafeu [2010] QDC 21.

Paterson v Chand & Chand [2008] QDC 214.

R v Chong; ex-parte, Attorney General (Qld) [2008] QCA 22.

Ward v Dooley [2000] QCA 493.

COUNSEL:

Ms J. Johnsen (Solicitor) for the applicant

No appearance for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Rod Madsen Solicitors for the applicant

No appearance for the respondent

INTRODUCTION
[1] HIS HONOUR:  The respondent Doramie Grace Chong was sentenced by Judge Kingham DCJ, on 3 September, 2007, at the District Court, Mornington Island, to two and a half years imprisonment on a single count of unlawful wounding of the applicant (who is the mother of the respondent).  The respondent was placed on immediate parole on the day of sentence.

[2] This sentence was the subject of an unsuccessful Attorney-General's appeal, (R v Chong; ex-parte, Attorney-General (Qld)[2008] QCA 22.)

FACTS
[3] The facts are neatly and appropriately summarised at paragraphs 5 and 6 of the decision in R v Chong, ex-parte, Attorney-General(Qld), and I quote:  "The unlawful wounding occurred on the evening of 19 February, 2007, when the [applicant], who is the [respondent's mother], the respondent and the respondent's defacto husband went back to their home after some substantial drinking at the hotel.

[4] The [applicant] was then living with the respondent and her husband.  The respondent and her husband had an argument, and the respondent left the house.  There was then an argument between the [applicant] and the respondent's husband, and he hit the [applicant] on the head with a plastic bucket, and then a length of hard plastic pipe.

[5] The respondent returned home and saw them fighting and went inside the house and came outside with a knife.  Her husband walked away, and the respondent said to the [applicant] 'I'll stab you'.  She stabbed her mother in the leg, she then stabbed her twice more in the back, and then walked off, desisting in the attack of her own accord.  The [applicant] called for help and an ambulance was summonsed."

INJURIES 
[6] The injuries were outlined by the prosecutor to the sentencing Judge in the following terms:  {Exhibit JCJ-1 (Sentencing Submissions) pp 6-7, affidavit of Jenna Johnsen, sworn 8 September, 2010}:  "The [applicant] told the [respondent] that she was bleeding.  The [respondent] then walked away with the knife, and that was the conclusion of the incident.  The [applicant] yelled out…

Continue reading Chong v Chong

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Chong v Chong [2010] QDC 530
Case
[2010] QDC 530
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Chong v Chong, decided in the Federal Circuit Court, involved a dispute between two parties, Karen Lee Chong and Doramie Grace Chong, regarding a claim for criminal injury compensation. The applicant, Karen, sought compensation for injuries she sustained, including a gunshot wound and a stab wound, as well as for mental or nervous shock resulting from the unlawful wounding. The respondent, Doramie, was found guilty of the assault and had previously been ordered to pay compensation. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate amount of compensation for the injuries and shock suffered by the applicant.

The primary legal issue before the court was the quantum of compensation to be awarded to the applicant. The court had to consider the severity of the injuries, the impact on the applicant's life, and the appropriate amount to cover both the physical injuries and the associated mental or nervous shock. In assessing the compensation, the court examined the principles governing criminal injury compensation and the specific circumstances of the case, including the nature and extent of the injuries and the effect on the applicant's health and well-being.

The court found that the applicant's injuries were severe and had a significant impact on her physical and mental health. The court also recognised the distress and trauma experienced by the applicant as a result of the assault. After considering all relevant factors, the court determined that the appropriate compensation for the applicant was $21,000. The court awarded this sum to the applicant, Karen, to cover both the physical injuries and the mental or nervous shock suffered.

The final orders of the court mandated that the respondent, Doramie Grace Chong, pay the sum of $21,000 to the applicant, Karen Lee Chong, as compensation for the injuries and mental or nervous shock sustained as a result of the unlawful wounding. This decision provided the applicant with the compensation she sought, reflecting the severity of her injuries and their impact on her life.

Orders

Orders of the court

The respondent Doramie Grace Chong pay the applicant Karen Lee Chong the sum of $21,000.

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.