HSD v CDC; AE v CDC

[2011] QDC 295

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

HSD  v CDC; AE v CDC [2011] QDC 295

PARTIES:

HSD
(Applicant)

v

CDC
(Respondent)

AE (AS LITIGATION GUARDIAN FOR SEB)
(Applicant)

v

CDC
(Respondent)

FILE NO/S:

26/10

28/10

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Application for criminal compensation

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court, Beenleigh

DELIVERED ON:

22 November, 2011

DELIVERED AT:

Beenleigh

HEARING DATE:

23 September 2011

JUDGE:

Dearden DCJ

ORDER:

1.        The respondent CDC pay the applicant HSD the sum of $37,500.

2.        The respondent CDC pay the applicant AE (as litigation guardian for SEB) the sum of $36,000.

3.        The Public Trustee of Queensland be appointed to receive, hold and manage the compensation on trust for SEB.

4.        The Public Trustee of Queensland be empowered to invest the compensation and any accretions in such investments as trustees are empowered to invest under the Trusts Act 1973.

5.        The Public Trustee of Queensland shall apply such monies for the maintenance, benefit and support of SEB.

6.        The Public Trustee of Queensland shall be entitled to its reasonable sanction and administration fees.

7.        The Public Trustee of Queensland shall pay to the solicitor for the litigation guardian of SEB, the reasonable solicitor/client costs of and incidental to this application from any monies received from the respondent or from any other person or entity pursuant to this order.

CATCHWORDS:

APPLICATION – Criminal Compensation – two counts of maintaining a sexual relationship with a child – where each applicant was the subject of one of the counts – mental or nervous shock – adverse impacts

LEGISLATION:

Corrective Services Act2006 (Qld) s.184(1)(a)(ii) & (2)

Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld) ss. 25(7) & 40(1)

Trusts Act 1973 (Qld)

Victims of Crime Assistance Act 2009 (Qld) ss. 154 & 155

Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld) s.1A

CASES:

JL v AV [2002] 2 Qd R 367

JMR obo SRR v Hornsby [2009] QDC 147

SAY v AZ; ex parte Attorney General [2006] QCA 462

Vlug v Carrasco [2006] QCA 561

COUNSEL:

T.A. Nielsen for applicants HSD and AE

A. Entriken for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Burns Law for the applicants HSD and AE

Ide Lawyers for the respondent

Introduction

1. The respondent, CDC, pleaded guilty on 16 June 2008 at the Beenleigh District Court to two counts of maintaining a sexual relationship.  Count 1 involved a relationship with the complainant SEB (on whose behalf as litigation guardian Ms AE brings these proceedings) and Count 2 involved the applicant HSD.

1. In respect of each count, the respondent was sentenced to nine years’ imprisonment, concurrent, without a parole eligibility date being set.[1]

   [1] Corrective Services Act 2006 s.184(1)(a)(ii) & (2) – the respondent would be eligible for parole after serving half of the head sentence.

Facts

1. The respondent, who was a neighbour of the applicant HSD and the complainant SEB for much of the period between October 1999 and June 2007, abused a “grandfather-type” relationship to commit sex offences against each of the complainants, who were then children. 

1. In respect of the applicant HSD, the…