Krnic v Thaow - [2010] QDC 256

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Krnic v Thaow [2010] QDC 256

PARTIES:

MARIAN KRNIC
(Applicant)

v

JAMES YENG THAOW
(Respondent)

FILE NO/S:

9/10

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Application for criminal compensation

ORIGINATING COURT:

Beenleigh

DELIVERED ON:

18 June 2010

DELIVERED AT:

Kingaroy

HEARING DATE:

22 April 2010

JUDGE:

Dearden DCJ

ORDER:

The respondent James Yeng Thaow pay the applicant Marian Krnic the sum of $35,250.00.

CATCHWORDS:

APPLICATION – CRIMINAL COMPENSATION – grievous bodily harm.

LEGISLATION:

Victims of Crime Assistance Act 2009 (Qld)

Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld)

CASES:

Kennedy v Faafeu [2010] QDC 21

Patterson v Chand & Chand [2008] QDC 214

COUNSEL:

A M Cappellano for the applicant

No appearance for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Campbell & White Lawyers for the applicant

No appearance for the respondent

Introduction

The respondent James Yeng Thaow pleaded guilty in the Beenleigh District Court before me on 23 July 2009 to one count of grievous bodily harm. The applicant was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment with an immediate parole release date on the date of sentence.

Facts

The applicant (then a 37 year old male) and the respondent (then a 23 year old male) were involved in a road rage incident at approximately 6.45 pm on 2 March 2008 at Browns Plains Road, Browns Plains. Each had tailgated the other down Browns Plains Road and each had given the other “the finger”. Both the applicant and the respondent pulled to the side of Browns Plains Road and parked their vehicles near a 7-11 service station. Both the applicant and the respondent then got out of their vehicles and proceeded to have a verbal argument. A fist fight subsequently occurred and the applicant was struck in the face with a closed fist by the respondent approximately three times, and as a result fell to the ground unconscious. The applicant was transported by ambulance to Logan Hospital and the respondent returned to his car and drove away. Four witnesses to the altercation state that they did not see the applicant throw any punches[1].
[1]Exhibit B (schedule of facts) affidavit of Abigail Webb sworn 23 December 2009.

Injuries

The applicant was examined at the Logan Hospital by Dr Aimee Murphy. A CT scan revealed “a tripod type fracture of the left face involving a depressed fracture of the left zygoma [cheekbone], the anterior and posterior walls of maxillary sinus, the orbital floor and the infraorbital”. On 11 March 2008 the applicant was operated on to reduce his zygomatic fracture[2].
[2]Exhibit B (schedule of facts) affidavit of Abigail Webb sworn 23 December 2009.

The law

I refer to and adopt my exposition of the relevant law pursuant to the transitional provisions of the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 2009 (VOCAA) as set out in Kennedy v Faafeu [2010] QDC 21 at paragraph 6. The application before me complies with the relevant provisions of VOCAA and the now repealed Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (COVA).

I refer to and adopt my exposition of the relevant applicable law under COVA…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Krnic v Thaow

Details

AGLC: Krnic v Thaow [2010] QDC 256
Case: [2010] QDC 256
Decision Date: 18 June 2010

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Krnic v Thaow was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria, where Marian Krnic sought criminal injury compensation against James Yeng Thaow. The dispute arose from an incident where Thaow had committed grievous bodily harm against Krnic, resulting in significant physical and psychological injuries. Krnic applied for compensation under the provisions of the Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic).

The primary legal issue the court had to address was whether Thaow was liable for compensation for the injuries caused to Krnic. This involved determining the extent of the grievous bodily harm and whether it met the threshold for compensation under the statutory framework. Additionally, the court had to consider the principles of causation and the quantum of damages to be awarded, taking into account both the physical and psychological impact of the injuries.

In its judgment, the court found Thaow liable for the grievous bodily harm inflicted upon Krnic. The court acknowledged the severe nature of the injuries, which included both physical trauma and lasting psychological effects. It was determined that the injuries met the criteria for compensation under the Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic). The court calculated the appropriate compensation, considering the totality of the harm and the relevant statutory provisions. The court ordered Thaow to pay Krnic the sum of $35,250.00 as compensation for the injuries sustained.

Orders

Orders of the court

The respondent James Yeng Thaow pay the applicant Marian Krnic the sum of $35,250.00.

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.

CITATION:	Krnic v Thaow [2010] QDC 256
PARTIES:	MARIAN KRNIC (Applicant) v JAMES YENG THAOW (Respondent)
FILE NO/S:	9/10
DIVISION:	Civil
PROCEEDING:	Application for criminal compensation
ORIGINATING COURT:	Beenleigh
DELIVERED ON:	18 June 2010
DELIVERED AT:	Kingaroy
HEARING DATE:	22 April 2010
JUDGE:	Dearden DCJ
ORDER:	The respondent James Yeng Thaow pay the applicant Marian Krnic the sum of $35,250.00.
CATCHWORDS:	APPLICATION – CRIMINAL COMPENSATION – grievous bodily harm.
LEGISLATION:	Victims of Crime Assistance Act 2009 (Qld) Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld)
CASES:	Kennedy v Faafeu [2010] QDC 21 Patterson v Chand & Chand [2008] QDC 214
COUNSEL:	A M Cappellano for the applicant No appearance for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Campbell & White Lawyers for the applicant No appearance for the respondent