RE: Prefumo - [2013] WADC 127

RE: PREFUMO [2013] WADC 127

Last Update: 13/08/2013

RE: PREFUMO [2013] WADC 127
Jurisdiction:	DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2013] WADC 127
Case No:	APP:33/2013	Heard:	19 JULY 2013
Coram:	HERRON DCJ	Delivered:	13/08/2013
Location:	PERTH	Supplementary Decision:
No of Pages:	14	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Appeal dismissed
[Click here for Judgment in Adobe Acrobat Format ]

On Appeal from:	Jurisdiction: CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION ASSESSOR OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA Coram: H L PORTER File Number: CI 000229 of 2013
Parties:	LOUIS MARCEL GILBERT PREFUMO
Catchwords:	Appeal Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003 s 17 Alleged offence No person charged burden of proof
Legislation:	Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003
Case References:	Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenue [2009] HCA 41 Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336 Gullelo v Halloran [2008] WADC 145 Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355

JURISDICTION : DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CIVIL

LOCATION : PERTH CITATION : RE: PREFUMO [2013] WADC 127 CORAM : HERRON DCJ HEARD : 19 JULY 2013 DELIVERED : 13 AUGUST 2013 FILE NO/S : APP 33 of 2013 MATTER : IN THE MATTER of Pt 7of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003

IN THE MATTER of an Appeal by

BETWEEN : LOUIS MARCEL GILBERT PREFUMO

Appellant

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION ASSESSOR OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : H L PORTER

File No : CI 000229 of 2013

Catchwords:

Appeal - Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003 s 17 - Alleged offence - No person charged - burden of proof

(Page 2)

Legislation:

Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003

Result:

Appeal dismissed

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant : In person

Amicus Curiae

: Mr P D Spragg appeared on behalf of the Chief Executive Officer of the Department of the Attorney General

Solicitors:

Appellant : Not applicable

Amicus Curiae

: State Solicitor for Western Australia

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenue [2009] HCA 41
Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336
Gullelo v Halloran [2008] WADC 145
Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355

(Page 3)

1 HERRON DCJ: This is an appeal pursuant to pt 7 of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003 (the Act) against a decision of the chief assessor of criminal injuries compensation dated 13 March 2013 refusing the appellant's (Mr Prefumo's) application for criminal injuries compensation pursuant to s 17 of the Act. By letter to Mr Prefumo dated 11 February 2013, the chief assessor outlined her provisional determination and invited Mr Prefumo to make further submissions which invitation he took up by letter dated 5 March 2013. By letter dated 13 March 2013 to Mr Prefumo, the chief assessor provided brief reasons explaining her reasons for refusing the application.

Background

2 The following account is taken from the police incident report and running sheet which was provided to the chief assessor and which is also annexed to Mr Prefumo's…

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 RE: Prefumo

Details

AGLC: RE: PREFUMO [2013] WADC 127
Case: [2013] WADC 127
Decision Date: 13 AUGUST 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Re: Prefumo was heard before the Court of Appeal, where the parties were contesting the eligibility of compensation under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003. The dispute centred on whether the applicant had suffered an injury as a result of an alleged offence for which no one had been charged, a crucial requirement for compensation eligibility under the Act. The Court of Appeal was tasked with determining the legal standards and burden of proof required to substantiate the applicant's claims.

The central legal issue before the Court was the interpretation of section 17 of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003, which pertains to the eligibility for compensation when no person has been charged with the alleged offence. The Court needed to delineate the burden of proof on the applicant to demonstrate that they had suffered an injury due to such an offence. This involved assessing the legislative intent, the requirements of the Act, and the standard of proof necessary to satisfy the statutory criteria.

The Court of Appeal meticulously examined the statutory provisions and relevant case law, concluding that the burden of proof required to establish eligibility for compensation under section 17 was a balance of probabilities. The Court held that the applicant must demonstrate on the balance of probabilities that they suffered an injury as a result of an alleged offence for which no person has been charged. The Court found that the applicant had not met this burden of proof, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal. Consequently, the applicant's claim for compensation was rejected.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal dismissed

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.