RTE v Brown

Case [2013] QSC 166


SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

RTE v Brown [2013] QSC 166

PARTIES:

RTE
(applicant)
v
DENNY JOHN BROWN
(respondent)

FILE NO/S:

SC No 682 of 2010

DIVISION:

Trial

PROCEEDING:

Application

ORIGINATING COURT:

Supreme Court at Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

4 June 2013

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

27 March 2013

JUDGE:

Atkinson J

ORDERS:

Applicant awarded $75,000 by way of compensation against the respondent pursuant to the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – PROCEDURE – CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION – QUEENSLAND – where the respondent pleaded guilty to three counts of unlawful wounding of a 10 year old child – where the respondent injected the applicant child with a needle containing a morphine based substance on three occasions – where the applicant child suffered serious post-traumatic stress disorder and attempted suicide on a number of occasions – where the applicant child suffered severe mental or nervous shock, puncture wounds and infection with hepatitis C – where applicant seeks criminal compensation for injuries sustained – whether the infection with hepatitis C is comparable as an adverse impact of a sexual offence under section 1A of the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995

Victims of Crime Assistance Act 2009 (Qld), s 154, s 155
Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld), s 20, s 21, s 24, s 25
Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld), s 1A, s 2

R v Brown; ex parte Attorney-General of Queensland [2009] QCA 342, related

COUNSEL:

R M O’Gorman for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Howden Saggers for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent

  1. The applicant is a child who was the victim of terrible offences committed against him by the respondent Denny John Brown.  The details of the offences committed are found in sentencing remarks imposed by me on Mr Brown on 16 July 2009 and referred to in the appellate decision R v Brown; ex parte Attorney-General of Queensland [2009] QCA 342.

  1. The respondent was convicted on his own plea of guilty of three counts of unlawful wounding of the applicant when the applicant was only 10 years old.

  1. The application for criminal compensation is brought pursuant to section 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (COVA) for an injury pursuant to section 20 of that Act as a result of a personal offence as defined in section 21 of COVA.

  1. The respondent was convicted prior to the commencement of the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 2009. Sections 154 and 155 of the Victims of Crime Assistance Act provide that in the circumstances that apply here the application for compensation may be brought under COVA, and if brought within time, as this application was, the court must, pursuant to section 155(3), decide the application under the relevant provision of COVA.

  1. The counts of unlawful wounding occurred on dates unknown between 30 April 2007 and 4 July 2007. 

  1. The applicant was the son of the respondent's then de facto partner.  As I have mentioned, he was aged 10 years…

Continue reading RTE v Brown

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
RTE v Brown [2013] QSC 166
Case
[2013] QSC 166
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of RTE v Brown involved the applicant, RTE, seeking compensation from the respondent, Brown, under the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995. The respondent had pleaded guilty to three counts of unlawful wounding against the applicant, a 10-year-old child, by injecting the child with a needle containing a morphine-based substance on three separate occasions. As a result of the assaults, the applicant suffered severe mental or nervous shock, post-traumatic stress disorder, attempted suicide, puncture wounds, and infection with hepatitis C. The applicant sought compensation for the injuries sustained.

The legal issue before the court was whether the infection with hepatitis C could be considered as an adverse impact of a sexual offence under section 1A of the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995. The court needed to determine if the infection with hepatitis C was comparable to the adverse impacts of a sexual offence for the purposes of the regulation.

The court found that the infection with hepatitis C was not comparable to the adverse impacts of a sexual offence under section 1A of the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995. However, the court awarded the applicant $75,000 by way of compensation against the respondent under the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 for the injuries sustained.

Orders

Orders of the court

Applicant awarded $75,000 by way of compensation against the respondent pursuant to the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995

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.