DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
KSV v RWB [2007] QDC 233
PARTIES:
KSV
Applicantv
RWB
RespondentFILE NO/S:
59/2007
DIVISION:
Civil
PROCEEDING:
Application for Criminal Compensation
ORIGINATING COURT:
District Court Beenleigh
DELIVERED ON:
10 October 2007
DELIVERED AT:
Beenleigh
HEARING DATE:
31 July 2007
JUDGE:
Dearden DCJ
ORDER:
The respondent, RWB, pay the applicant, KSV, the sum of $25,000 and costs to be assessed on a standard basis
CATCHWORDS:
Application – Criminal Compensation – Indecent Dealing – Mental or Nervous Shock
LEGISLATION:
Criminal Code (Qld) ss 663A, 663AA, 663B, 663B(1), 663B(2), 663BA
Criminal Code and Justices Act Amendment Act 1975 (Qld)
s 5
Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld) s 46(2)
CASES:
R v Jones; ex parte McClintock [1996] 1 Qd R 524
R v Boughton; ex parte Holt (unreported) District Court, Helman DCJ – No 124/1993 – 13 August 1993
COUNSEL:
Ms M Poriz (solicitor) for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent
SOLICITORS:
Lee Lawyers for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent
Introduction
The applicant, KSV, was the complainant in respect of five counts of indecent dealing with a child under 16 years, who was under 14 years, to which counts the respondent, RWB, pleaded guilty before me at the Southport District Court on 24 March 2006. In respect of those five counts, the respondent was sentenced to five years imprisonment with an eligibility for post prison community based release after two years.
Facts
The applicant, KSV, was born on 14 October 1977. The five counts which are the subject of this application occurred on dates unknown between 14 January 1981 (when the applicant was still four years old) and 31 January 1982 (when the applicant was then five years old). This applicant was one of eight different complainants against whom the respondent had committed a range of sexual offences over a period between 1957 and 2003.
The facts of the relevant offences, as set out in the Schedule of Facts[1], are as follows:
[1] Exhibit 1 in Sentence Proceedings
Count 11
“The [applicant] was 4 or 5 years old at the time of the offence. The [respondent] was between 44 and 45 years old and is the [applicant’s] uncle by virtue of his son’s marriage to the [applicant’s] mother.
When the [applicant] was 4 years old turning 5 she went with the [respondent] in his vehicle to buy alcohol for a family Sunday dinner in Runaway Bay. The [applicant] was the only other occupant and was seated in the front passenger seat. As they drove away from the house the [respondent] placed his left hand underneath the leg of the [applicant’s] shorts. He then moved his hand between her legs and touched her on the outside of her vagina on the skin. His hand remained on her vagina for about five minutes while they drove to the shop and he fondled the lips of her vagina both inside and out, but did not penetrate the vaginal orifice. He stopped…
Continue reading KSV v RWB
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- KSV v RWB [2007] QDC 233
- Case
- [2007] QDC 233
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine whether the applicant's claim for mental or nervous shock was valid under the relevant legislation and whether the applicant was entitled to compensation. The court considered the evidence presented by the applicant and the respondent regarding the nature and extent of the applicant's mental distress. The court also examined the relevant statutory provisions and case law to determine the criteria for awarding compensation for mental or nervous shock.
After considering the evidence and the law, the court found that the applicant's claim for mental or nervous shock was valid and that the applicant was entitled to compensation. The court determined that the respondent's actions had caused the applicant significant mental distress, which met the criteria for compensation under the Criminal Injury Compensation Scheme. The court awarded the applicant $25,000 in compensation and ordered the respondent to pay the applicant's costs on a standard basis.
Orders
Orders of the court
The respondent, RWB, pay the applicant, KSV, the sum of $25,000 and costs to be assessed on a standard basis
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.