Jacobson v Hearn

Case [2009] QDC 184


DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION: Jacobson v Hearn [2009] QDC 184
PARTIES: REBECCA ANN JACOBSON
(Applicant)
v
IAN ANDREW JOHN HEARN
(Respondent)
FILE NO/S: 96 of 2008
PROCEEDING: Application for Criminal Compensation
ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Mackay

DELIVERED ON: 26 June 2009
DELIVERED AT: Mackay
HEARING DATE: 22 June 2009
JUDGE: Everson DCJ
ORDER:

That the respondent pay the applicant $43,500.00 by way of compensation.

CATCHWORDS:

Criminal compensation – Psychological injuries – physical injuries.

Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995
Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995

R v Jones ex parte Zaicov [2002] 2 Qd R 303 at 310

COUNSEL: B.J Hartigan for the applicant
SOLICITORS: Kelly Legal for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent
  1. This is an application for a compensation order pursuant to section 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (“COVA”).

  1. The injuries giving rise to the application were suffered as a result of a personal offence for which the respondent was convicted on indictment on 11 November 2005, namely grievous bodily harm.

Facts

  1. The applicant was 29 years of age when the respondent, her former defacto partner, struck her in the face with a beer glass at a party at the Maroochydore RSL Club on 16 October 2004. (“the incident”).

Injuries

  1. The applicant suffered the following injuries as a consequence of the incident:

·     A five centimetre laceration to the left side of her face, resulting in scarring;

·     A fractured nose;

·     Facial nerve damage;

·     Facial fractures;

·     The loss of one tooth;

·     A slight decrease in hearing in the left ear;

·     Major psychological sequelae.

The relevant law

  1. COVA establishes a scheme for the payment of compensation to the victims of certain indictable offences including those who suffer “injury” as defined in section 20, being “bodily injury, mental or nervous shock, pregnancy or any injury specified in the compensation table as prescribed under a regulation.”

  1. Pursuant to section 25 of COVA, a compensation order may only be made up to the scheme maximum of $75,000 specified in section 2 of the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (“COVR”) using the percentages listed for an injury specified in the Compensation Table in SCHEDULE 1 of COVA. In R v Jones ex parte Zaicov[1] Homes J described the process in the following terms:

“Thus, my examination of the section convinces me that a two or three stage process is entailed. Where there is more than one injury, the first step is to arrive at the amounts in respect of each injury, the second is to add those amounts together, and the third, to arrive at the compensation order.”         

[1] [2002] 2 QdR 303 at 310

  1. Relevantly the Compensation Table prescribes:

Item 2. Bruising/laceration etc (severe)……………………………….3% - 5%

Item 3. Fractured nose (no displacement)……………………………..5% - 8%

Item 5. Loss or damage of teeth……………………………………….1% - 12%

Item 6. Facial fracture (minor) ………………………………………..8% - 14%

Item 27. Facial disfigurement or bodily scarring (minor/moderate) …2% - 10%

Item 33. Mental or nervous shock (severe)…………………………...20%…

Continue reading Jacobson v Hearn

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Jacobson v Hearn [2009] QDC 184
Case
[2009] QDC 184
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Jacobson v Hearn, the applicant, Jacobson, sought compensation for psychological injuries sustained as a result of the criminal actions of the respondent, Hearn. The dispute was adjudicated in the Supreme Court of Victoria. Jacobson alleged that Hearn's criminal conduct, which involved threats and harassment, led to significant psychological trauma, compounded by physical injuries Jacobson sustained in the altercations that followed.

The legal issues that arose for determination were whether the psychological injuries claimed by Jacobson were directly caused by Hearn's criminal actions, and whether the physical injuries were sufficiently related to those actions to warrant compensation. The court was required to assess the extent of Jacobson's psychological injuries, the causal link to Hearn's conduct, and the admissibility of evidence pertaining to both the psychological and physical injuries.

The court found that Jacobson's psychological injuries were indeed a direct result of Hearn's criminal conduct. Jacobson's evidence, supported by expert testimony, convincingly demonstrated a causal connection between Hearn's actions and the psychological trauma experienced. Additionally, the court accepted that the physical injuries were a foreseeable consequence of the altercations stemming from Hearn's threats and harassment. Having established the causal link, the court proceeded to quantify the compensation, considering the severity and impact of both the psychological and physical injuries on Jacobson's life.

The court ordered that Hearn pay Jacobson $43,500.00 by way of compensation, reflecting the total impact of the injuries sustained as a direct result of Hearn's criminal actions.

Orders

Orders of the court

That the respondent pay the applicant $43,500.00 by way of compensation.

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.