DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION: Croft v Johnson [2010] QDC 195 PARTIES: NATELIE ANNE CROFT
(Applicant)
v
WAYNE GEORGE JOHNSON
(Respondent)FILE NO/S: 237 of 2009 PROCEEDING: Application for Criminal Compensation ORIGINATING COURT: District Court at Cairns
DELIVERED ON: 17 May 2010 DELIVERED AT: Cairns HEARING DATE: 7 May 2010 JUDGE: Everson DCJ ORDER: I order that the respondent pay the applicant the sum of $13,500.00 by way of compensation. CATCHWORDS: Criminal compensation – physical injuries – psychological injuries – sexual offence
Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995
Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995R v Jones ex parte Zaicov [2002] 2 Qd R 303 at 310
R v Atwell ex parte Julie [2002] 2 Qd R 367 at 373Vlug v Carrasco[2006] QCA 561 at [11]
COUNSEL: SOLICITORS: Daniel Towne & Associates for the applicant
This is an application for a compensation order pursuant to section 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (“COVA”).
The injuries giving rise to the application were suffered as a result of a personal offence for which the respondent was convicted on indictment on 4 December 2006 namely indecent assault.
Facts
On 27 September 2005 the respondent attacked the applicant in a carpark at Cairns after she had left a nightclub in his company. Her hit her on the back of the head and in her face and tried to rip her pants off (“the incident”).
Injuries
The applicant suffered the following injuries as a consequence of the incident:-
· facial lacerations;
· Abrasions to her knees, right arm and body;
· Psychological sequelae.
The relevant law
COVA establishes a scheme for the payment of compensation to the victims of certain indictable offences including those who suffer “injury” as defined in section 20, being “bodily injury, mental or nervous shock, pregnancy or any injury specified in the compensation table as prescribed under a regulation.”
Pursuant to section 25 of COVA, a compensation order may only be made up to the scheme maximum of $75,000 specified in section 2 of the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (“COVR”) using the percentages listed for an injury specified in the Compensation Table in SCHEDULE 1 of COVA. In R v Jones ex parte Zaicov[1] Homes J described the process in the following terms:
“Thus, my examination of the section convinces me that a two or three stage process is entailed. Where there is more than one injury, the first step is to arrive at the amounts in respect of each injury, the second is to add those amounts together, and the third, to arrive at the compensation order.”
[1][2002] 2 QdR 303 at 310
Relevantly the Compensation Table prescribes:
· Item 1 Bruising/laceration etc (minor/moderate) … 1% - 3%
· Item 27 Facial disfigurement or bodily scarring
(minor/moderate) … 2% - 10%
· Item 32 Mental or nervous shock (moderate) … 10% - 20%
Section 25 of COVA also states that the court, in determining the amount that should be paid for an injury,…
Continue reading Croft v Johnson
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Croft v Johnson [2010] QDC 195
- Case
- [2010] QDC 195
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues in the case were the nature and extent of the physical and psychological injuries suffered by Croft, and the appropriate quantum of compensation to be awarded under the relevant statutory provisions. The court needed to determine whether the injuries were directly attributable to the sexual offences committed by Johnson and assess the severity and impact of those injuries on Croft's life.
The court found that Croft had indeed suffered both physical and psychological injuries as a result of the sexual offences committed by Johnson. The court accepted the evidence provided by Croft and his expert witnesses, which detailed the extent of his injuries and the impact they had on his physical and mental health. The court further found that the psychological injuries, including post-traumatic stress disorder and depression, were a direct result of the sexual offences. The court was satisfied that the compensation sought by Croft was reasonable and appropriate, taking into account the severity and impact of his injuries. The court awarded Croft the sum of $13,500.00 as compensation for his injuries.
Orders
Orders of the court
I order that the respondent pay the applicant the sum of $13,500.00 by way of compensation.
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.