Legal Research
Cases
Re Sunjich

Re Sunjich

Case [2022] WADC 66 29 July 2022

Aggravated & Exemplary Damages

Criminal Law

Type to search within this case.

JURISDICTION : DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
IN CIVIL

LOCATION:   PERTH
CITATION:   RE SUNJICH [2022] WADC 66
CORAM:   MASSEY DCJ
HEARD:   4 MAY 2022
DELIVERED          :   29 JULY 2022
FILE NO/S:   APP 6 of 2022
MATTER: IN THE MATTER of Part 7 of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003
AND
IN THE MATTER of an Appeal by

BETWEEN: BLAZENKA SUNJICH
Appellant

ON APPEAL FROM:
Jurisdiction              :   CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION ASSESSOR OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Coram:   R GUTHRIE
File Number            :   CIC 2309 of 2018

Catchwords:

Criminal injuries compensation - Appeal - Proved offence - Economic loss - Extension of time

Legislation:

Nil

Result:

Appeal allowed

Representation:

Counsel:

Appellant	:	Mr J N Trigg
Amicus Curiae	:	Ms G Beck on behalf of the Chief Executive Officer of the Department of Justice

Solicitors:

Appellant	:	Stephen Browne Lawyers (South Perth)
Amicus Curiae	:	State Solicitor for Western Australia

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

August v Lynch [2019] WADC 78
Bothma v Hildebrand [2019] WADC 92
Harris v Sycamore [2022] WADC 4
JY [2013] WADC 187
Malec v JC Hutton Pty Ltd [1990] HCA 20; (1990) 169 CLR 638
Medlin v State Government Insurance Commission [1995] HCA 5; (1995) 182 CLR 1
Michael v Panetta (1994) 10 SR (WA) 323
Re Goodwin [2020] WADC 128
Robinson [2017] WADC 18
Savic v Duric [2021] WADC 53
State of New South Wales v Moss [2000] NSWCA 133
TAW v NJS [2011] WADC 187
Underwood v Underwood [2018] WADC 13

MASSEY DCJ:

The appellant has had the misfortune to be the victim of two assaults. The first assault (the first assault) was committed by her former husband, Kieran James Brosnahan, on 26 October 2015. The second assault (the second assault) was committed by Jodie Papillia, the respondent, on 26 November 2021.
The appellant suffered injuries as a result of both of those assaults.
The appellant subsequently filed applications for criminal injuries compensation in the one claim form in respect of both assaults.
By an amended compensation award dated 21 January 2022, the Assessor of Criminal Injuries Compensation (the Assessor) ordered that the appellant receive a total of $48,304.50 compensation in respect of the first assault. The letter accompanying that award from the Assessor said that compensation had been assessed as follows:

Injuries

$17,500.00

Reports

$6,475.50

Treatment expenses

$11,114.00

Loss of earnings

$10,000.00

Travel expenses

$2,000.00

Future treatment expenses to a maximum of:

$1,215.00

The Assessor made a separate award in the amount of $10,000 in respect of the second assault dated 26 November 2021. No letter accompanied that award and no reasons were provided for the Assessor's decision.
The appellant takes no issue with the award made in respect of the first assault.
The appellant appeals against the award in respect of the second assault.
The appellant filed a notice of appeal against the decision of the Assessor on 12 January 2022. By virtue of s 55(3) of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003 (WA) (the Act) an appeal must be filed within…

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 Sunjich

Details

AGLC: Re Sunjich [2022] WADC 66
Case: [2022] WADC 66
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the District Court of Western Australia, Blazeka Sunjich (the appellant) appealed a decision made by the Assessor of Criminal Injuries Compensation (the Assessor) in relation to the compensation payable to the appellant as a result of an assault (the second assault). The appellant was previously awarded compensation in respect of a different assault (the first assault) and took no issue with that award. The appellant filed an appeal against the decision of the Assessor in respect of the second assault on 12 January 2022. Given that the Assessor's decision was dated 26 November 2021, the last date for commencing an appeal against the Assessor's decision was 17 December 2021. The appellant's appeal was therefore filed six days late. The appellant accordingly sought leave to extend the time within which to appeal. The District Court allowed the application for an extension of time and ordered that the time in which the appellant be required to lodge the notice of appeal be extended to 12 January 2022. In hearing the appeal, the court had to decide the application afresh and determine the matter solely on the evidence and information that was in the possession of the Assessor or may receive further evidence and information. The court accepted that the appellant was the victim of a proved offence in respect of both the first and second assaults and that the most significant and long-lasting injuries were the psychiatric and psychological injuries resulting from the assaults. The court accepted the appellant's evidence that she had returned to work in her agistment business between the first assault and prior to the second assault occurring. However, the court took into account the uncertainty which it had already mentioned and the paucity of information as to the appellant's likely earnings from the agistment business. The court assessed the appellant's lost earnings on a global basis in the amount of $7,500. The court increased the award in respect of the second assault to $17,500. The court ordered that the time in which the appellant be required to lodge the notice of appeal be extended to 12 January 2022 and that the decision of the Assessor be varied to increase the amount of compensation to $17,500.

Orders