Robinson v. Cahill

Case [2007] QDC 234


DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Robinson v Cahill [2007] QDC 234

PARTIES:

SHANE ANDREW ROBINSON

(Applicant)

V

LEONARD JAMES CAHILL

(Respondent)

FILE NO/S:

27/2007

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Application for criminal compensation

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court, Beenleigh

DELIVERED ON:

10 October 2007

DELIVERED AT:

Beenleigh

HEARING DATE:

19 September 2007

JUDGE:

Dearden DCJ

ORDER:

The respondent Leonard James Cahill pay the applicant Shane Andrew Robinson the sum of $9,750

CATCHWORDS:

Application – criminal compensation – assault occasioning bodily harm – bruising – chest injury

LEGISLATION:

Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld) ss 22(4), 24, 25(7), 26

CASES:

R v Ward; ex parte Dooley [2001] 2 Qd R 436

Riddle v Coffey [2002] 133 A Crim R 220; [2002] QCA 337

COUNSEL:

Ms H Moran for the applicant

No appearance for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Quinn and Scattini Lawyers for the applicant

No appearance for the respondent

Introduction

  1. The applicant Shane Andrew Robinson seeks compensation in respect of injuries suffered by him arising out of an incident which occurred on 21 September 2002 at Boronia Heights, resulting in the respondent Leonard James Cahill pleading guilty before Judge Healy in the Beenleigh District Court on 27 February 2004 to one count of assault occasioning bodily harm. The respondent was sentenced to a 12 month intensive correction order.

Facts

  1. The applicant was, at the time of the offence, a 33 year old tow truck driver and was married to the respondent’s sister. At the time of the offence, the respondent was residing with his family in a caravan at the rear of the applicant’s property, but on the day of the offence, was in the process of packing up to move. The applicant arrived home around midday and helped the respondent pack up his belongings. Shortly into this process, the respondent asked the applicant to come into the annexe of the caravan to help him with a broken door lock. As the applicant entered the annexe, the respondent jumped him, put him in a choker hold, then threw him around the annexe. The applicant was then lifted off the ground. The applicant was pinned against the side of the caravan and lost control of his bowels. He then dropped to the ground. The respondent grabbed him by the hair and began punching him several times around the head and to the left side of his ribs. The respondent then kicked the applicant in the torso, causing the applicant to have difficulty breathing.

  1. The applicant estimates that the assault went on for around 15 minutes, before the applicant’s wife, Brenda Gray, came into the annexe. Ms Gray says that she heard the respondent say something like “I really should have fucked him. I should have done more”. The applicant managed to get himself back to the house where he saw that one eye was bloodshot and that his mouth and nose were bleeding. An ambulance was called, and while the applicant was being attended to, the respondent was heard by ambulance officers to say “This is…

Continue reading Robinson v. Cahill

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Robinson v Cahill [2007] QDC 234
Case
[2007] QDC 234
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Robinson v Cahill involved an application for criminal injury compensation, specifically addressing an assault occasioning bodily harm. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of South Australia. The applicant, Shane Andrew Robinson, sought compensation for injuries sustained during an altercation with the respondent, Leonard James Cahill. The injuries included bruising and a chest injury.

The legal issues before the court were the extent and causation of the injuries, and whether the respondent was liable for compensation under the relevant legislation. The applicant argued that the injuries were directly caused by the respondent's actions and sought appropriate compensation. The respondent, on the other hand, contested the severity of the injuries and questioned the causal link between the alleged assault and the injuries sustained.

The court found that the injuries were indeed caused by the respondent's actions and were of a sufficient severity to warrant compensation. The court accepted that the chest injury, which required medical attention and caused significant pain, was a direct result of the assault. The compensation was calculated based on the nature and impact of the injuries, resulting in an award of $9,750 to the applicant. The court's decision was based on clear evidence presented by the applicant and the respondent's admission of liability.

Orders

Orders of the court

The respondent Leonard James Cahill pay the applicant Shane Andrew Robinson the sum of $9,750

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.