EGM v Commissioner of Victims Rights

Case [2020] NSWCATAD 181

Civil and Administrative Tribunal


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: EGM v Commissioner of Victims Rights [2020] NSWCATAD 181
Hearing dates: 3 July 2020
Date of orders: 15 July 2020
Decision date: 15 July 2020
Jurisdiction:Administrative and Equal Opportunity Division
Before: M Riordan, Senior Member
Decision:

The decision of the Senior Assessor dated 24 February 2020 is set aside. In substitution for that decision the following decision is made:

“The applicant is eligible for a Category C recognition payment in the sum of $5,000.”

Catchwords:

Victims Rights and Support – administrative review – act of violence - grievous bodily harm

Legislation Cited:

Victims Rights and Support Act 2013

Victims Rights and Support Regulation 2013

Administrative Decisions Review Act 1997

Crimes Act 1900

Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013

Cases Cited:

AM v R [2012] NSWCCA 203

BJR v R [2008] NSWCCA 43

BWL v Commissioner of Victims Rights [2015] NSWCATAD 235

HAOUI v Regina [2008] NSWCCA 209

Overall v R (1993) 71 A Crim R 170 at 173

R v Donovan [1934] 2 KB 498 at 509

R v Remilton [2001] NSWCCA 546

R v Woodland [2007] NSWCCA 29 at [35]

Roger Lee Vann v Craig Michael Palmer [2001] ACTSC 12

Regina v Shannon [2003] NSWCCA 106

Regina v Sumeo [2002] NSWCCA 271

Casey v Pel-Air Aviation Pty Ltd; Helm v Pel-Air Aviation Pty Ltd [2015] NSWSC 566

CNB v Commissioner of Victims Rights [2020] NSWCATAD 31

Texts Cited:

None cited

Category:Principal judgment
Parties: EGM (Applicant)
Commissioner of Victims Rights (Respondent)
Representation: Solicitors:
P Davis, Womens Legal Service NSW (Applicant)
P Srikanth, Victims Services (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2020/00094535
Publication restriction: A non-publication Order is made under s 64 (1) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (No. 2) (NSW) in respect of the names of private individuals, and other information which might identify them.

REASON FOR DECISION

  1. These proceedings were commenced by an Application for Administrative Review (‘the Application”) filed on 26 March 2020, in which the applicant sought administrative review of a decision made by a delegate of the Respondent in respect of an Application for Victims Support. The applicant is known by the pseudonym ‘EGM’.

Background

Application for Victims Support

  1. On 25 May 2018, EGM lodged an Application for Victims Support under the provisions of the Victims Rights and Support Act 2013 (“the Act”), which alleged that she was the primary victim of an act of violence in the nature of domestic/family violence that was perpetrated by a named offender between 1 January 2016 and 31 December 2017, at Taree, New South Wales, as follows:

I experienced emotional and physical domestic violence in my relationship with (the offender). On one occasion in particular he assaulted me including pulling me by the hair and bashing me in the head causing bruising on by ribs; lumps on my head.

  1. The application alleged that EGM suffered both physical and psychological injuries as a result of the act of violence and that she sought a recognition payment.

  2. The act…

Continue reading EGM v Commissioner of Victims Rights

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Egm v Commissioner of Victims Rights [2020] NSWCATAD 181
Case
[2020] NSWCATAD 181
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of EGM v Commissioner of Victims Rights, the applicant sought a Category C recognition payment from the Commissioner of Victims Rights following an incident of grievous bodily harm. The case was heard in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of Australia. The central issue was whether the applicant was eligible for the recognition payment under the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 2013. The applicant argued that the act of violence against them met the criteria for a Category C recognition payment, while the Commissioner contended that the payment should not be granted.

The Tribunal considered the relevant provisions of the Act and the evidence provided by the applicant. The key legal issue was whether the harm suffered by the applicant was a result of an act of violence, and if so, whether it qualified as grievous bodily harm under the Act. The Tribunal assessed the severity of the injuries and the circumstances surrounding the incident to determine if the harm met the statutory criteria. After careful consideration, the Tribunal concluded that the harm suffered by the applicant was indeed grievous bodily harm, and therefore, the applicant was eligible for the recognition payment.

The Tribunal found that the decision made by the Senior Assessor on 24 February 2020 was incorrect. The Tribunal set aside that decision and substituted it with a new decision that the applicant was eligible for a Category C recognition payment in the sum of $5,000. The Tribunal's reasoning was based on the evidence presented and the interpretation of the relevant statutory provisions. The Tribunal determined that the applicant's injuries and the circumstances of the incident met the criteria for a Category C recognition payment.

Orders

Orders of the court

The decision of the Senior Assessor dated 24 February 2020 is set aside. In substitution for that decision the following decision is made:

“The applicant is eligible for a Category C recognition payment in the sum of $5,000.”

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.