Doyle v Gardner

[2001] QDC 286

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:	Doyle v Gardner [2001] QDC 286
PARTIES:	NEVILLE ROBERT DOYLE  Applicant
And
GRANT RAYMOND GARDNER  Respondent
FILE NO/S:	D93/01
DIVISION: PROCEEDING:
ORIGINATING	Mackay
COURT:
DELIVERED ON:	15 October 2001
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	20, 21 and 24 August 2001
JUDGE:	Judge Samios
ORDER:	Compensation order refused.
CATCHWORDS:	Criminal law – compensation – personal offence- mental or nervous shock - applicant not credible and exaggerating symptoms – compensation order refused. Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 Dooley v. Ward (2000) QCA 493; R v Moors ex parte Alex (1994) 2 Qd R 315; French v Green Court of Appeal No. 4481 of 1997; Di Camillo v Wilcox (1964) WAR 44, 46; Re Guppy (1998) QSC 256; Orley v. Bath & Ors [2000] QDC 338; R v. Kazekoff exparte Ferguson (2001) 2 Qd.R. 320, 325. Reddicliffe v. Toth & Ors No. D.610 of 2000, 18 February 2000, Brabazon DCJ.
COUNSEL:	Mr Aberdeen for the Applicant Mrs Pagani for the Respondent
SOLICITORS:	Barry, Beaverson & Stenson for the Applicant Bill Cooper & Associates for the Respondent

(a)	Item 1 – bruising laceration (minor/moderate) (2%)	$1,500.00
(b)	Item 4 –fractured nose (displacement/surgery) (15%)	11,250.00
(c)	Item 5 – loss or damage of teeth (3%)	2,250.00
(d)	Item 17 – fracture/loss of use of finger (5%)	3,750.00
(e)	Item 27 – facial disfigurement or bodily scarring
(minor/moderate) (9%)	6,750.00
(f)	Item 33 – mental and nervous shock (severe) (30%)	22,500.00

TOTAL $48,000.00

[2] This application is a civil proceeding and the issues of fact on the application must
be decided on the balance of probabilities (s30 (1) and (2)).

1. The facts that have to be proved by the applicant are:

(a)	Conviction of the respondent on indictment
(b)	Of a personal offence
(c)	Injury suffered by the applicant
(d)	Because of the offence(s24)

1. “Injury” so far as is relevant on this application is defined by s20 of the Act as bodily injury, mental or nervous shock or any injury specified in the compensation table. A “personal offence” is defined by s21 of the Act as an indictable offence committed against the person of someone.

2. The Act requires that in deciding whether an amount, or what amount, should be ordered to be paid for an injury, the court must have regard to everything relevant, including, for example, any behaviour of the applicant that directly or indirectly contributed to the injury (s25 (7)).

3. The conviction of the respondent on indictment relied upon by the applicant is that which occurred when on 12 November 1998 the respondent pleaded guilty before His Honour Judge McGill SC in the District Court at Emerald to the following offence:

   “that on the 19th day of July 1998 at Moranbah in the State of Queensland the respondent entered the dwelling of the applicant with intent to commit an indictable offence in the dwelling

   and the respondent used actual violence
   and the respondent damaged property”

   His Honour did not record a conviction and sentenced the respondent…