Lowdown v Estate of Holroyd
[2008] QDC 99
•26 February 2008
DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
Lowdown v Estate of Holroyd [2008] QDC 99
PARTIES:
NANCY LOWDOWN
(Applicant)
v
ESTATE OF JOHN DUNCAN HOLROYD (deceased)
(Respondent)FILE NO/S:
465 of 2004
DIVISION:
PROCEEDING:
Application for Criminal Compensation
ORIGINATING COURT:
DELIVERED ON:
26 February 2008
DELIVERED AT:
Cairns
HEARING DATE:
30 November 2007
JUDGE:
Bradley DCJ
ORDER:
That the respondent pay to the applicant the sum of $22,500 by way of criminal compensation.
CATCHWORDS:
COUNSEL:
No appearance for either party, written submissions received on behalf of the applicant
SOLICITORS:
ILS QLD LIMITED Solicitors for the applicant
On 21 November 2001 John Duncan Holroyd was convicted of unlawfully wounding the applicant at Pormpuraaw on 7 September 2001. Pormpuraaw is a remote Aboriginal community on Cape York Peninsula.
The applicant now seeks an order for compensation for the injuries suffered by her because of the offence pursuant to s 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (“the Act”).
The application was filed in this Court on 19 November 2004 but is only now in a position to proceed to hearing. On 9 November 2004 John Holroyd passed away leaving three now adult children. As The Public Trustee of Queensland is not administering Mr Holroyd’s estate, service of the application and the supporting material has been effected on each of the three of the deceased’s children, the beneficiaries of his estate.
At the time of the commission of the offence the applicant was 33 years of age and was the de facto partner of John Holroyd. They had been living together for about five years. At about 10.00 am on 7 September 2001 the applicant and John Holroyd were drinking with other people in the kitchen of their home. The applicant and John Holroyd argued about beer and John Holroyd picked up a knife which was near a pillow on the side of a mattress on the floor. He stabbed the applicant in the back of her head. Both were standing at the time. John Holroyd then sat on the floor and the applicant called out for assistance from her brother who drove her to the Health Clinic.
When seen by a registered nurse at the Health Clinic the applicant was in a distressed state and was bleeding heavily. The applicant was observed to have an 8 cm long full thickness straight edged cut to her head which was closed with 11 sutures. One section of the wound was unable to be closed to the shape and nature of the cut.
During the sentencing proceedings John Holroyd asserted that he had been trying to trim the applicant’s hair at the time she was injured. That clearly was not accepted by the sentencing judge, His Honour Judge White, and there is no suggestion of any behaviour on the part of the applicant which contributed to her injuries.
In an affidavit sworn on 16 August 2006 the applicant states that as a result of the offence she suffered the following difficulties:-
“a. I saw him pick up the butchers knife and come towards me. I felt scared and turned around to protect myself.
b. I thought he was going to kill me.
c. I felt a sharp pain straight away to the back of my head where he stabbed me with the knife.
d. I saw a lot of blood coming out of my head. This scared me.
e. I was able to walk to the back door and call out to my brother for help. He took me to the hospital.
f. At the hospital I had to have 11 stitches in the back of my head.
g. I had to stay in hospital for one night.
h. My head was very sore and I was in a lot of pain.i. I still feel very dizzy especially when I walk in the hot time of the day.
j. I am still in pain and it hasn’t gone away. My head hurts every day.
k. I still have to visit the Flying Doctors one day every week.
l. They give me checkups and tablets.m. I am still angry with him because he hurt me and I haven’t been myself since, mainly because of the dizzy feelings.”
On 14 February 2006 the applicant was interviewed and assessed by Chris Richardson, a psychologist and in her report of 15 February 2006 Ms Richardson concludes that the applicant “is reporting mild to moderate symptomatology associated with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and mild to moderate Depression.”
Ms Richardson details in her report the initial and ongoing problems reported by the applicant as being suffered as a result of the offence.
Ms Richardson concludes:-
“Ms Lowdown reports being wounded by Mr Holroyd on 7 September 2001 and as a result she currently experiences psychological distress associated with PTSD and Depression. It is apparent that the events in September 2001 have had a profound effect on Ms Lowdown and she should attend counselling to assist her gain some control over her distress. Given her symptoms, it is expected that 27 sessions with an appropriately qualified therapist would assist her gain some control over her distress and help her maintain equilibrium in her daily activities. The Australian Psychological Society recommended fee for a one hour session with a psychologist is currently $181.”
I have not received any material or information to indicate that the applicant has significant scarring as a result of the injury although she does report ongoing physical symptoms as referred to above.
I assess compensation in accordance with the Compensation Table which is Schedule 1 to the Act as follows:-
Item 25: Stab wound (moderate) 15% $11,250.00
Item 32: Mental or nervous shock (moderate) 15% $11,250.00
$22,500.00
I order that the respondent pay to the applicant the sum of $22,500 by way of criminal compensation.
0
0
0