R v W - [2009] QDC 349

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v W [2009] QDC 349

PARTIES:

R

(Applicant)

v

W

(Respondent)

FILE NO/S:

830 of 2007

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Originating Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court of Queensland

DELIVERED ON:

18 November 2009

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

16 November 2009

JUDGE:

Rackemann DCJ

ORDER:

That the respondent pay the applicant the amount of $25,000 by way of compensation pursuant to the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld).

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – PROCEDURE – CRIMINAL COMPENSATION – QUEENSLAND – AMOUNT AND CONDUCT AFFECTING – where unlawful relationship of a sexual nature with a circumstance of aggravation – where four counts of indecent treatment of a child under 16 under care – where applicant did not suffer post traumatic stress disorder or any other psychiatric disorder – where applicant found to have suffered adverse impacts under s 1A(1)(k) of the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld) – where applicant did not contribute to injury in any way

Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld)
Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld), s 1A(1) and (2)

Cases considered:
AEK v TBU (unreported) Rafter SC DCJ, 15 July 2009
RMC v NAC [2009] QSC 149

Re JI v AV [2001] QCA 510

COUNSEL:

Ms P James (solicitor) for the applicant

No appearance by or for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid Queensland for the applicant

No appearance by or for the respondent

This is an application for compensation pursuant to the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld), for the adverse impacts as a result of sexual offences for which the respondent was convicted on 7 May 2004. The relevant offences were one count of maintaining an unlawful relationship of a sexual nature with a circumstance of aggravation and four counts of indecent treatment of a child under 16 years with a circumstance of aggravation, being that the applicant was under his care.

The applicant was 15-16 years of age at the time of the offences. The respondent, who was then aged 34-35 years, used his membership of a fire service to attract the applicant’s interest. The indecent dealing counts involved causing the applicant to masturbate him on two occasions, masturbating the applicant (after giving him alcohol) and sucking the applicant’s penis.

The applicant was significantly affected by the offending, although he did not suffer post traumatic stress disorder or any other psychiatric disorder. He claims for adverse impacts of the kind referred to in s 1A of the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld) which provides, in part, as follows:

“1A Prescribed injury
(1) For section 20 of the Act, the totality of the adverse impacts of a sexual offence suffered by a person, to the extent to which the impacts are not otherwise an injury under section 20, is prescribed as an injury.
(2) An adverse impact of a sexual offence includes the following—
(a) a sense of violation;
     (b) reduced self worth or perception;
     (c) post-traumatic stress disorder;
     (d) disease;
     (e) lost or reduced physical immunity;
     (f) lost…

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 R v W

Details

AGLC: R v W [2009] QDC 349
Case: [2009] QDC 349
Decision Date: 18 November 2009

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of R v W, the applicant, who was a victim of four counts of indecent treatment of a child under 16 while under the care of the applicant, sought compensation from the respondent under the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld). The application was heard in the District Court of Queensland. The respondent did not contest the application for compensation, but the amount claimed was a matter of contention. The central issue before the court was whether the applicant had suffered adverse impacts warranting compensation and, if so, the appropriate quantum.

The court was required to determine the extent of adverse impacts suffered by the applicant, and whether these warranted compensation under section 1A(1)(k) of the regulation. The court also needed to assess whether the applicant's contribution to their injury, if any, would mitigate the compensation amount. Given that the applicant did not suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder or any other psychiatric disorder, the court focused on the broader concept of adverse impacts as defined under the regulation.

In delivering its decision, the court found that the applicant had indeed suffered adverse impacts due to the respondent's criminal conduct. The court noted the severity of the offences and the age of the victim at the time of the offences. It acknowledged that the lack of a diagnosed psychiatric disorder did not preclude the applicant from experiencing significant adverse impacts. The court awarded the applicant $25,000 in compensation, reflecting the gravity of the offences and the impact on the applicant's life.

The court ordered that the respondent pay the applicant $25,000 as compensation. This decision underscores the court's commitment to recognising and compensating victims of serious criminal conduct, even in the absence of a diagnosed psychiatric disorder.

Orders

Orders of the court

That the respondent pay the applicant the amount of $25,000 by way of compensation pursuant to the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld).

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:	R v W [2009] QDC 349
PARTIES:	R (Applicant) v W (Respondent)
FILE NO/S:	830 of 2007
DIVISION:	Civil
PROCEEDING:	Originating Application
ORIGINATING COURT:	District Court of Queensland
DELIVERED ON:	18 November 2009
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	16 November 2009
JUDGE:	Rackemann DCJ
ORDER:	*That the respondent pay the applicant the amount of $25,000 by way of compensation pursuant to the Criminal Offence Victims Act* 1995 (Qld).**
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW – PROCEDURE – CRIMINAL COMPENSATION – QUEENSLAND – AMOUNT AND CONDUCT AFFECTING – where unlawful relationship of a sexual nature with a circumstance of aggravation – where four counts of indecent treatment of a child under 16 under care – where applicant did not suffer post traumatic stress disorder or any other psychiatric disorder – where applicant found to have suffered adverse impacts under s 1A(1)(k) of the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld) – where applicant did not contribute to injury in any way Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld) Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld), s 1A(1) and (2) Cases considered: AEK v TBU (unreported) Rafter SC DCJ, 15 July 2009 RMC v NAC [2009] QSC 149 Re JI v AV [2001] QCA 510
COUNSEL:	Ms P James (solicitor) for the applicant No appearance by or for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Legal Aid Queensland for the applicant No appearance by or for the respondent