Robertson v Moran

[2010] QDC 221

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Robertson v Moran [2010] QDC 221

PARTIES:

JASON MICHAEL ROBERTSON

Applicant

AND

MICHAEL JOHN MORAN

Respondent

FILE NO/S:

OA3714/02

DIVISION:

PROCEEDING:

Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court, Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

28 May 2010

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

21 May 2010

JUDGE:

McGill DCJ

ORDER:

Leave to applicant to start enforcement proceedings.

CATCHWORDS:

PRACTICE – Enforcement – leave to enforce after six years – exercise of discretion

UCPR r 799

Tonkin v Johnson [1999] 2 Qd R 318 – applied.
Walkden v Townsville City Council [2004] QDC 23 – distinguished.
World Square Pty Ltd v Taylor [1991] Qd R 583 – considered.

COUNSEL:

Application without oral hearing

SOLICITORS:

Nathan Lawyers for the applicant

The respondent was not represented

1. On 28 October 2002 Bradley DCJ made an order that the respondent pay the applicant $9000 by way of compensation pursuant to s 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995. Although some payments have been made under that order, it has never been satisfied. The applicant has now applied under r 799 for leave to start an enforcement proceeding against the respondent based on that order. Leave is necessary because more than six years have elapsed since the order was made: r 799(2)(a). The application may be made ex parte (r 799(3)) and in the circumstances I do not think there would be any point in ordering that it be served on the respondent.

Background

1. The circumstances giving rise to the order go back to 10 April 1999.  On 17 October 2000 the respondent pleaded guilty before this court to one count of unlawfully wounding the applicant and one count of burglary in the night with violence whilst armed on that date.  The reasons given when the order for compensation was made indicate that the offence involved the respondent striking the applicant while the applicant was trying to hold the front door of his house closed to prevent the respondent from coming in.  The respondent at that time was armed with a knife and that caused two stab wounds to the applicant’s left shoulder and a further wound to his right hand.  Compensation was assessed on the basis of minor laceration, minor stab wound and minor scarring, totally 12% which when applied to the scheme maximum produced a figure of $9,000.  No special orders were made in relation to payment:  the order took effect as a money order of this court.[1]

   [1]It satisfies the definition of “money order” in Schedule 2 of the Supreme Court of Queensland Act 1991.

1. The history of the matter thereafter appears in written submissions filed on behalf of the applicant on 18 May 2010.  After the order was made on 8 November 2002 the respondent offered to pay $50 per week, in a letter pointing out that he had only casual employment and had a wife and two-year-old son to support.  It does not appear that any particular further steps were taken in response, other than the sending of a couple of…