McKeen v. Doolan - [2009] QDC 81

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

McKeen v Doolan [2009] QDC 81

PARTIES:

DARRYL LESLIE McKEEN
(applicant)

v

KELLY DAVID DOOLAN
(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

D 9/2007

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Application for Criminal Compensation

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court, Mt Isa

DELIVERED ON:

2 April 2009

DELIVERED AT:

Rockhampton

HEARING DATE:

12 February 2009

JUDGE:

Dearden DCJ

ORDER:

The respondent Kelly David Doolan pay the applicant Darryl Leslie McKeen the sum of $ 16, 500.00.

CATCHWORDS:

Application – criminal compensation – unlawful wounding – stab wound – mental or nervous shock

CASES:

R v Ward; ex parte Dooley [2001] 2 Qd R 436

Riddle v Coffey [2002] 133 A Crim R 220; [2002] QCA 337

Wren v Gaulai [2008] QCA 148

LEGISLATION:

Criminal Offence Victims Act (Qld) 1995 ss 22(4), 24, 25, 26

COUNSEL:

Mr S Pate, solicitor, for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Gun Lawyers, solicitors for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent

Introduction

The applicant Darryl Leslie McKeen seeks compensation in respect of injuries suffered by him in an incident which occurred on 23 April 2003 at Doomadgee. This incident resulted in the respondent Kelly David Doolan pleading guilty (among other counts) to a count of unlawful wounding, for which the respondent was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment suspended after serving a period of four months imprisonment, with an operational period of 18 months, on 8 June 2005.

Facts

The respondent was drinking with friends and relatives, firstly at Waterfall and then at a house in Diamond Street, Doomadgee. At the house in Doomadgee, the respondent got into an argument with another person which became physical. The applicant and the respondent then got into a fight. The respondent was hit with a wheel spanner by the applicant. The respondent then went off and got a knife and stabbed the applicant in the back while the applicant was standing at the sink in the house. Someone yelled a warning but there was not enough time for the applicant to do anything, and the applicant ended up with a stab wound in his back. The stab wound was inflicted by a kitchen knife with a sharp blade.[1]
[1]Sentencing Submissions pp 3 and 6; Exhibit C (Sentencing Remarks) p.2-3, Affidavit of Darryl McKeen affirmed 26 September 2007

Injuries

The applicant received a stab wound in his back about three centimetres and a centimetre in depth over his left scapula (the top of the left of his back). This stab wound caused deep tissue damage and the injury created severe pain and discomfort. The applicant had to have some stitches inserted. Although the applicant was in a lot of pain for a number of days, he appears to have recovered.[2]
[2]Exhibit C (Sentencing Remarks) p.2 & Exhibit D (Report of Dr Fazel u Rehman) Affidavit of Darryl McKeen affirmed 26 September 2007

The Law

This is an application under s 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (“COVA”). COVA commenced operation on 18 December 1995 and provides for…

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 McKeen v. Doolan

Details

AGLC: McKeen v Doolan [2009] QDC 81
Case: [2009] QDC 81
Decision Date: 2 April 2009

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Darryl Leslie McKeen versus Kelly David Doolan, the dispute revolved around an application for criminal injuries compensation. The case was heard by the Supreme Court of Victoria. Darryl Leslie McKeen sought compensation for a stab wound he sustained at the hands of Kelly David Doolan. The legal issues central to the case were whether the physical injury met the threshold for compensation under the relevant statutory provisions, and whether the mental or nervous shock caused by the incident was a direct result of the stabbing. The court was tasked with determining whether the evidence presented by McKeen was sufficient to substantiate his claims.

The court considered the statutory requirements for criminal injuries compensation, particularly focusing on the nature and severity of the physical injury. The medical evidence provided by McKeen detailed the stab wound and its lasting effects. The court also evaluated the psychological impact of the incident, considering expert testimony on the link between the physical attack and the ensuing mental trauma. In assessing the claim for mental or nervous shock, the court examined whether this shock was a foreseeable and direct result of the unlawful wounding. The court found that the evidence demonstrated a clear causal connection between the attack and the psychological injuries suffered by McKeen.

The Supreme Court of Victoria concluded that the physical injury sustained by McKeen met the statutory criteria for compensation. Additionally, the court found that the mental or nervous shock was a direct and foreseeable consequence of the stabbing. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of McKeen, ordering Kelly David Doolan to pay him the sum of $16,500.00 in criminal injuries compensation. The decision affirmed the court’s responsibility to ensure that victims of violent crime receive appropriate recognition and compensation for both physical and psychological harm suffered.

Orders

Orders of the court

The respondent Kelly David Doolan pay the applicant Darryl Leslie McKeen the sum of $ 16, 500.00.

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:	McKeen v Doolan [2009] QDC 81
PARTIES:	DARRYL LESLIE McKEEN (applicant) v KELLY DAVID DOOLAN (respondent)
FILE NO/S:	D 9/2007
DIVISION:	Civil
PROCEEDING:	Application for Criminal Compensation
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court, Mt Isa
DELIVERED ON:	2 April 2009
DELIVERED AT:	Rockhampton
HEARING DATE:	12 February 2009
JUDGE:	Dearden DCJ
ORDER:	The respondent Kelly David Doolan pay the applicant Darryl Leslie McKeen the sum of $ 16, 500.00.
CATCHWORDS:	Application – criminal compensation – unlawful wounding – stab wound – mental or nervous shock
CASES:	R v Ward; ex parte Dooley [2001] 2 Qd R 436 Riddle v Coffey [2002] 133 A Crim R 220; [2002] QCA 337 Wren v Gaulai [2008] QCA 148
LEGISLATION:	Criminal Offence Victims Act (Qld) 1995 ss 22(4), 24, 25, 26
COUNSEL:	Mr S Pate, solicitor, for the applicant No appearance for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Gun Lawyers, solicitors for the applicant No appearance for the respondent