Morley v Taylor

Link copied
Case Copied 6 min read

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Morley v Taylor [2006] QDC 358

PARTIES:

JASON FRANCIS MORLEY

(Applicant)

v

ROBERT JAMES TAYLOR
(Respondent)

FILE NO/S:

D23 of 2006

DIVISION:

Civil Jurisdiction

PROCEEDING:

Application for Criminal Compensation

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court, Beenleigh

DELIVERED ON:

18 August 2006

DELIVERED AT:

Beenleigh

HEARING DATE:

15 August 2006

JUDGE:

Tutt DCJ

ORDER:

The respondent pay to the applicant the sum of $6,000.00 by way of compensation for injury caused by the respondent to the applicant for which the respondent was convicted by the District Court at Beenleigh on 4 October 2005.

CATCHWORDS:

Criminal compensation – threatening violence and unlawful assault – mental or nervous shock.

Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 ss. 24, 25(6) and (7) and 31.

Ferguson v Kazakoff [2000] QSC 156.

COUNSEL:

Mr L Menolotto for the applicant.

SOLICITORS:

Keith Scott & Associates for the applicant.

No appearance for the respondent.

Introduction

  1. The applicant, Jason Francis Morley claims compensation under Part 3 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (“the Act”) for alleged bodily injury he sustained arising out of the criminal conduct of the respondent, Robert James Taylor, who was convicted by the District Court at Beenleigh on 4 October 2005 for the offences of threatening violence and unlawful assault to the applicant on 19 March 2005 at Beaudesert.

  1. The respondent although being served with the application made no appearance at the hearing.

  1. The application for compensation is made pursuant to s 24 of the Act and is supported by the following material:-

(a)        the affidavit with exhibits of the applicant, sworn 15 February 2006 and filed at Beenleigh 1 March 2006;

(b)        the affidavit with exhibits of Samit Seth, solicitor, sworn 17 February 2006 and filed on 1 March 2006;

(c)        the affidavit with exhibit of Geoffrey Leonard Grantham, psychologist, sworn 3 February 2006 and filed on 1 March 2006; and

(d)        the affidavit with exhibit of Frederick Ralph Peet sworn 26 July 2006 and filed on 2 August 2006.

Facts

  1. The circumstances of the incident are summarised in the applicant’s statement exhibited to his affidavit and show that on the 19 March 2006 at his residence located in a caravan park at Beaudesert he was threatened with violence by the respondent and subsequently assaulted by him by being attacked with a knife which did not actually strike the applicant but penetrated the door of his caravan from which he was able to escape with his 4 year old daughter and call the police.

  1. The applicant described his injuries in his victim impact statement submitted at the sentence hearing of the respondent on the 4 October 2005 in the following terms:

“Although I wasn’t physically assaulted, what transpired on the day of the offence was life threatening and therefore frightening.  I felt that I had been imprisoned in my own caravan not knowing what was going to happen next.  Further if Robbie was to get inside the caravan, I felt that I would definitely be killed along with my daughter.

As…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Morley v Taylor and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2006] QDC 358
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Morley v Taylor, the applicant, Morley, sought compensation from the respondent, Taylor, for an unlawful assault that had been committed against him. The assault occurred on 15 December 2004, when Taylor unlawfully assaulted Morley, causing him injury. The matter was heard in the Queensland Magistrates Court. The applicant sought compensation under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003 (Qld), claiming that the assault had caused him mental or nervous shock. The respondent denied that the assault had caused the applicant any compensable injury.

The court was required to determine whether the assault had caused the applicant compensable injury in the form of mental or nervous shock. The court considered the relevant statutory provisions and the evidence presented by both parties. The court also considered the nature and extent of the applicant's injuries, as well as the circumstances of the assault. The court found that the applicant had suffered mental or nervous shock as a result of the assault, and that this shock was a direct result of the unlawful act committed by the respondent. The court also found that the applicant had not contributed to the injury in any way.

The court ordered that the respondent pay the applicant the sum of $6,000.00 by way of compensation for the injury caused by the respondent to the applicant. The court noted that the amount of compensation was not intended to be punitive, but rather to compensate the applicant for the injury suffered as a result of the respondent's unlawful act. The court also noted that the amount of compensation was not intended to be a full and final settlement of the applicant's claims, but rather a partial payment of compensation for the injury suffered. The court made no orders as to costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

The respondent pay to the applicant the sum of $6,000.00 by way of compensation for injury caused by the respondent to the applicant for which the respondent was convicted by the District Court at Beenleigh on 4 October 2005.

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.