DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
HL v Hill [2010] QDC 216
PARTIES:
HL
(Applicant)
V
WALTER NATHANIEL HILL
(Respondent)
FILE NO/S:
BD3585/09
DIVISION:
Civil
PROCEEDING:
Application for criminal compensation
ORIGINATING COURT:
District Court, Brisbane
DELIVERED ON:
13 May 2010
DELIVERED AT:
Brisbane
HEARING DATE:
8 April 2010
JUDGE:
Jones DCJ
ORDER:
The respondent pays the applicant $20,625 compensation pursuant to the Criminal Offences Victims Act 1995.
CATCHWORDS:
CRIMINAL COMPENSATION – Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 – Victims of Crime Assistance Act 2009 – sexual assault – mental or nervous shock – evidence of previous sexual abuse by person other than respondent – affects on personality development – contribution to injury- Regulation 1A –adverse impacts of sexual offence.
Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995
Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995
Victims of Crime Assistance Act 2009
Cases cited
R v Atwell, ex parte Jullie [2002] 2 Qd R 367, applied
PAJ v AAK [2010] QCA 78, followed and applied
Vlug v Carrasco [2006] QCA 561, applied
Vlug v Carrasco [2006] QDC 306 , discussed
MAV v ABA [2007] QCA 124, discussed
COUNSEL:
L. Dollar for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent
SOLICITORS:
Michael Hefford Solicitors and Attorneys for the applicant
The respondent was not represented
Introduction
The applicant seeks compensation for injuries she sustained as a result of a sexual assault by the respondent which occurred at or around midnight on 3 September 2007. On 16 December 2008 the respondent pleaded guilty before another judge to one count of burglary by breaking and one count of sexual assault. At the time of the assault the applicant was just under 20 years of age.
The circumstances surrounding the assault were that on the night in question the applicant was asleep in her cabin in a caravan park. She awoke around midnight to find the respondent sitting on the edge of her bed. She was wearing a top and underwear. He assaulted her by placing one of his hands between her legs and touching her vagina with his fingers through her underpants. At the time, the applicant was suffering from the condition vulvodynia, one of the symptoms of which includes tenderness around the entrance of the vagina. During the assault, the applicant felt a burning sensation and pain where the respondent had touched her. The applicant then stood up from the bed. The respondent pressed her to have sexual intercourse with him, which was refused. A friend of the respondent then entered the cabin and led him away. After the respondent had left the cabin, the applicant noted that her handbag had been taken.
Impact of assault on the applicant
The applicant described the impact on her life as a consequence of the assault in the following way:
“When the offence occurred I was very scared and shocked. I constantly feel paranoid and very easily startled if someone approaches me from behind. I find myself constantly looking behind me of a night and I must have all the windows shut when…
Continue reading HL v Hill
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- HL v Hill [2010] QDC 216
- Case
- [2010] QDC 216
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine whether the applicant's previous sexual abuse could be considered in assessing the impact of the current sexual assault, and if so, how it should be factored into the compensation calculation. The court also had to examine whether the respondent's actions met the criteria for compensation under the relevant legislation, particularly in relation to the adverse impacts of sexual offences.
The court found that the previous sexual abuse could be taken into account when assessing the impact of the current sexual assault, as it had contributed to the applicant's injury. The court concluded that the respondent's actions met the criteria for compensation under the legislation. The court ordered the respondent to pay the applicant $20,625 in compensation, taking into account the adverse impacts of the sexual offence and the applicant's previous sexual abuse. The court's decision was based on a thorough analysis of the evidence and the applicable statutory provisions, ensuring that the applicant received appropriate compensation for her injuries.
Orders
Orders of the court
The respondent pays the applicant $20,625 compensation pursuant to the Criminal Offences Victims Act 1995.
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.