Courville v. Stewart

[2008] QDC 245

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Courville v Stewart [2008] QDC 245

PARTIES:

James Norris Courville

(Applicant)

v

Christopher James Stewart

(Respondent)

FILE NO/S:

1147 of 2007

DIVISION:

Criminal compensation

PROCEEDING:

Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court

DELIVERED ON:

19 September 2008

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

14 August 2008

JUDGE:

Samios DCJ

ORDER:

I order the respondent to pay the applicant the sum of $10,500

CATCHWORDS:

Criminal law - criminal compensation – basis of sentencing - sequela of offence – assessment of compensation

Facer v Bennett & Anor [2001] QCA 395

Lewis v Williams (2005) QCA 314

SAY v AZ (2007) 2 Qd R 363, 370, 371

Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 Ss 19(1)(a), 20, 21, 22(3), 22(4), 24(2), 25(7), 25(8)

COUNSEL:

Mr Maher, for the applicant

Mr Byrnes, for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Trilby Misso Lawyers, for the applicant

VAJ Byrne & Co, for the respondent

1. The applicant claims from the respondent criminal compensation for injury caused by a personal offence committed by the respondent upon the applicant.

1. The offence committed by the respondent upon the applicant was an assault occasioning bodily harm on 2 June 2005.  The respondent was convicted on indictment for the offence on 28 April 2006.

1. The applicant was born on 6 February 1948.  He was fifty seven years of age when the offence was committed.

1. The respondent was born on 31 May 1967.  He was thirty eight years of age when he committed the offence.

1. When the respondent was sentenced for the offence, a schedule of agreed facts was presented to the court which contained a basis of sentence (the schedule). 

1. This schedule showed the applicant and the respondent were employed at a welding business in Gladstone.  On the morning of 2 June 2005 they became involved in a verbal argument.  This seems to have arisen from a perception by the applicant that the respondent was not pulling his weight in terms of their workload.  The applicant slapped the respondent once to the back of the head with his open palm and then walked off.  Witnesses stated that this slap was more of a “clip” and delivered with minimal force.  The applicant called the respondent a “fucking wanker” as he did this.  The respondent did not appear to react to this clip but a short time later there was some more verbal argument and a bit of pushing and shoving from both parties.  Two witnesses then saw the applicant hit the respondent in the face, one witness described this as a punch with a closed fist that hit the respondent in the lower jaw area.  Another witness “LEE” described it as a “slap” across the face/jaw area.  The respondent in his police interview described it as a punch.

1. After being hit, the respondent grabbed the applicant by the shirt and pushed him forcibly against a fridge.  The applicant swung his arms in a punching motion and the respondent then grabbed him again and threw him to the ground.  Two witnesses described this as being in the…