Corliss v RG - [2009] QChC 1

CHILDRENS COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Corliss v RG [2009] QChC 1

PARTIES:

MILO FILIPPO CORLISS

(Applicant)

v

RG

(Respondent)

FILE NO/S:

BD 1153/08

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Application for criminal compensation

ORIGINATING COURT:

Childrens Court of Queensland, Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

27 November 2009

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

25 November 2009

JUDGE:

Rafter SC DCJ

ORDER:

The respondent pay to the applicant the sum of $18,750 by way of compensation pursuant to s24 Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 for injuries sustained as a result of the offence of assault occasioning bodily harm which led to the conviction of the respondent in the Childrens Court of Queensland at Brisbane on 3 August 2007

CATCHWORDS:

APPLICATION – CRIMINAL COMPENSATION –assault occasioning bodily harm – physical injuries and mental or nervous shock

COUNSEL:

Y Chekirova for the applicant

No appearance by or for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Carter Capner Lawyers for the applicant

No appearance by or for the respondent

Introduction

The applicant seeks compensation pursuant to s.24 Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 for physical and emotional injuries caused by an assault committed by the respondent on 10 February 2007. By s.256 Juvenile Justice Act 1992, the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 applies to an offence committed by a child unless the contrary intention appears.

On 3 August 2007 the respondent pleaded guilty to inter alia, one count of assault occasioning bodily harm with a circumstance of aggravation. On 12 October 2007 he was sentenced to 90 days detention, to be released after serving 50 percent of the detention. The respondent had severed 45 days in pre-sentence custody. In relation to other unrelated charges he was placed on probation for 2 years.

The application and supporting material was served on the respondent on 11 September 2009. However when the matter came on for hearing on 17 September 2009 there was no affidavit of service. Ms Chekirova for the applicant was unable to contact her instructing solicitors. The matter was stood down to enable her to obtain proof of service. After the matter was stood down, the respondent contacted my Associate. He had arrived at Court late. He was advised that the matter had been stood down. However when the matter was called on later the same day the respondent did not appear. The matter was adjourned to 25 November 2009. The respondent is now in custody at the Arthur Gorrie Correctional Centre. He has been served with the notification of the hearing date and indicated that he did not wish to appear. There has been no appearance on his behalf.

Circumstances of the offence

At the time of the offence the respondent was 16 years of age. The applicant was 27 years of age.

The offence occurred on 10 February 2007. On the evening of 9 February 2007 the applicant and his girlfriend had gone to the cinema at Carindale Shopping Centre. At approximately 1.00am on 10 February they left the Centre and went to a park nearby, sat at a table and consumed…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Corliss v RG

Details

AGLC: Corliss v RG [2009] QChC 1
Case: [2009] QChC 1
Decision Date: 27 November 2009

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Corliss v RG, the applicant sought compensation for injuries sustained in an assault occasioning bodily harm. The dispute came before the Queensland District Court, where the applicant, Corliss, sought compensation under the provisions of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995. The respondent, RG, was convicted in the Children's Court of Queensland for the offence on 3 August 2007. Corliss argued that the injuries sustained from the assault resulted in physical injuries as well as mental and nervous shock, and thus sought a total of $18,750 in compensation.

The legal issues before the court were twofold: whether Corliss was entitled to compensation under the Act for the physical injuries and mental or nervous shock suffered as a result of the assault, and if so, what the appropriate quantum of compensation should be. The court had to consider the nature and extent of the injuries, the impact on Corliss's life, and any other relevant factors in determining the amount of compensation.

The court found that Corliss was indeed entitled to compensation for both the physical injuries and the mental and nervous shock suffered as a result of the assault. The court considered the severity of the injuries, the duration of the impact on Corliss's life, and the extent to which the injuries had affected Corliss's ability to enjoy life. The court determined that the appropriate amount of compensation to be paid by the respondent was $18,750. This sum reflected the totality of Corliss's injuries and the impact of the assault on his life.

The court ordered that the respondent pay to the applicant the sum of $18,750 by way of compensation for the injuries sustained as a result of the offence of assault occasioning bodily harm. The decision underscores the importance of providing appropriate compensation to victims of crime under the provisions of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995.

Orders

Orders of the court

The respondent pay to the applicant the sum of $18,750 by way of compensation pursuant to s24 Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 for injuries sustained as a result of the offence of assault occasioning bodily harm which led to the conviction of the respondent in the Childrens Court of Queensland at Brisbane on 3 August 2007

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.

CITATION:	Corliss v RG [2009] QChC 1
PARTIES:	MILO FILIPPO CORLISS (Applicant) v RG (Respondent)
FILE NO/S:	BD 1153/08
DIVISION:	Civil
PROCEEDING:	Application for criminal compensation
ORIGINATING COURT:	Childrens Court of Queensland, Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:	27 November 2009
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	25 November 2009
JUDGE:	Rafter SC DCJ
ORDER:	The respondent pay to the applicant the sum of $18,750 by way of compensation pursuant to s24 Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 for injuries sustained as a result of the offence of assault occasioning bodily harm which led to the conviction of the respondent in the Childrens Court of Queensland at Brisbane on 3 August 2007
CATCHWORDS:	APPLICATION – CRIMINAL COMPENSATION –assault occasioning bodily harm – physical injuries and mental or nervous shock
COUNSEL:	Y Chekirova for the applicant No appearance by or for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Carter Capner Lawyers for the applicant No appearance by or for the respondent