Hjo v Ipf

[2006] QDC 378

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

HJO v IPF [2006] QDC 378

PARTIES:

HJO

Applicant

V

IPF  

Respondent

FILE NO/S:

D2667/06

DIVISION:

PROCEEDING:

Originating Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

10 November 2006

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

26 October 2006

JUDGE:

McGill DCJ

ORDER:

Order the respondent pay the applicant $8000 compensation in respect of injuries suffered by her as a result of the offences for which the respondent was before the District Court on 17 November 2004.  Order the respondent pay the applicant’s costs of and incidental to this application to be assessed

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – Compensation – 1971 offence – limit of award – whether 1984 amendment retrospective

Criminal Code ss 663A, 663B.

Marsten v Kello [2000] QCA 410 – cited.
R v Bright, ex parte Punch (No. 3509 of 1996, Brabazon DCJ, 13.12.96, unreported) – cited.
R v Chong, ex parte Chong [2001] 2 Qd R 301 – cited.
R v Llorente, ex parte Hendry [2000] 2 Qd R 415 – followed.

COUNSEL:

J Stevenson, (solicitor) for the applicant

The respondent did not appear

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid, Queensland for the applicant

The respondent was not represented

1. This is an application for compensation under s 663B of the Criminal Code. On 17 November 2004 the respondent was convicted, after a trial in the District Court in Townsville, of three counts of indecent dealing with the applicant and one count of attempted rape of the applicant. A sentence of imprisonment was imposed. The applicant claims that as a result of the commission of those offences, she has suffered injury, namely psychiatric injury, and seeks compensation for that injury in accordance with the provisions of the Criminal Code. The respondent did not appear in response to the application.

1. There is evidence that the applicant suffered psychiatric injury as a result of the conduct which constituted the offences, and each of them.  The principal issue in the application is how the limits on the amount of compensation which can be ordered which were varied from time to time under the relevant provisions of the Code, operate in the circumstances of this case.  This gives rise to difficulties because, although the trial was in 2004, the offences were committed a long time ago, in 1971.  In the indictment it was alleged that each count occurred between 1 January 1971 and 1 January 1972 at Bowen.

History of the Provisions

1. Section 663B and the related provisions were inserted into the Code by the Criminal Code Amendment Act 1968, s 4, and came into force on 1 January 1969.  Section 3 of that Act provided that:

“This Act does not apply in respect of compensation for injury suffered before the commencement of this Act.”

The section, at that time, permitted compensation in “a sum not exceeding $2000” for injury to be paid by a person who was convicted on indictment of any indictable offence relating to the person of another, and the injury was suffered by reason of the offence.

1. The…