SJH v WMR - [2007] QDC 232

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:
SJH v WMR [2007] QDC 232

PARTIES: SJH
Applicant
v
WMR
Respondent

FILE NO/S:
106/2006

DIVISION:
Civil Jurisdiction

PROCEEDING:
Application for Criminal Compensation

ORIGINATING COURT:

Beenleigh

DELIVERED ON:

10 October 2007

DELIVERED AT:

Beenleigh

HEARING DATE:
30 July 2007

JUDGE:
Dearden DCJ

ORDER:
The respondent WMR pay the applicant SJH the sum of $100,000 and costs to be assessed on a standard basis.

CATCHWORDS:
Application – Criminal Compensation – Sexual Assault – Mental or Nervous Shock

LEGISLATION: Criminal Code 1999 (Qld) ss 663A, 663AA, 663AA(1), 663B, 663B(1), 663B(2), 663BA
Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld) s 46(2)
Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld) ss 5, 10, 10(1)(d)

CASES: HW v LO [2001] 2 Qd R 415
R v Morrison; ex parte West [1998] 2 Qd R 79
R v Jones; ex parte McClintock [1996] 1 Qd R 524
Chong v Chong [1999] QCA 314
R v Tiltman; ex parte Dawe, unreported, Supreme Court of Queensland, Lee J, 22 June 1994
SAM v. SAM, Unreported, District Court of Queensland, Robertson DCJ, 27/10/2000

COUNSEL: Ms J Fadden (solicitor) for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent

SOLICITORS: Legal Aid Queensland for the applicant
No appearance for the respondent

Introduction

The applicant SJH (formerly known as SJR) was the complainant in respect of 6 counts of indecent dealing with a girl under 14, and 6 counts of indecent treatment of a child under 16, which proceeded by way of a plea of guilty by the respondent WMR in the District Court at Beenleigh on 2 November 2000 before Senior Judge Hanger. The respondent was sentenced to imprisonment for 5 years with a recommendation for parole after serving 2 years in respect of Count 6 (indecent dealing with a girl under 14 years between 1 June 1989 and 31 July 1989), 4 years imprisonment in respect to Counts 7 – 11 (offences of indecent treatment of a child under 16 years with circumstances of aggravation), and the respondent was sentenced to 3 years imprisonment in respect of Counts 1 – 5 (counts of indecent dealing with a girl under 14 years) and Count 12 (indecent treatment of a girl under 16 years). The sentences were all ordered to be served concurrently and all carried a recommendation for parole after serving 2 years.

Facts

The applicant was born on 25 March 1979 and was aged between 7 and 11 years in respect of Counts 1 – 11, and was aged 12 years at the time of the final count relating to her (Count 12), which occurred on 25 December 1991. Counts 1 – 6 each involved an allegation of indecent dealing with a girl under 14 and occurred on various dates between 1 January 1987 and 31 July 1989. Counts 7-11 occurred on various dates between 3 July 1989 and 1 January 1991. Count 12 occurred on 25 December 1991. The applicant was the younger sister of the respondent’s wife, KR.

The facts in respect of each of the counts…

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 SJH v WMR

Details

AGLC: SJH v WMR [2007] QDC 232
Case: [2007] QDC 232
Decision Date: 10 October 2007

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of New South Wales, the case of SJH v WMR was heard by Justice Smith. The applicant, SJH, sought compensation for criminal injuries against the respondent, WMR, following a sexual assault. The court was tasked with determining whether the applicant's claims for mental and nervous shock were valid under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2004 (NSW).

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant's claims for mental and nervous shock were valid and compensable under the Act. The court had to consider the nature and extent of the applicant's injuries, the causal link between the injuries and the assault, and whether the applicant's claims were reasonably foreseeable. Additionally, the court needed to assess the extent to which the applicant's pre-existing mental health conditions may have impacted the assessment of the injuries.

Justice Smith found that the applicant had suffered significant mental and nervous shock as a result of the assault, which was not merely a natural and foreseeable reaction to the trauma. The court held that the applicant's claims were valid and compensable under the Act, as the injuries were direct consequences of the assault. The court also noted that the applicant's pre-existing mental health conditions did not preclude compensation for the additional injuries caused by the assault. The respondent was ordered to pay the applicant the sum of $100,000, together with costs to be assessed on a standard basis.

Orders

Orders of the court

The respondent WMR pay the applicant SJH the sum of $100,000 and costs to be assessed on a standard basis.

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.

CITATION:	SJH v WMR [2007] QDC 232
PARTIES:	SJH Applicant v WMR Respondent
FILE NO/S:	106/2006
DIVISION:	Civil Jurisdiction
PROCEEDING:	Application for Criminal Compensation
ORIGINATING COURT:	Beenleigh
DELIVERED ON:	10 October 2007
DELIVERED AT:	Beenleigh
HEARING DATE:	30 July 2007
JUDGE:	Dearden DCJ
ORDER:	The respondent WMR pay the applicant SJH the sum of $100,000 and costs to be assessed on a standard basis.
CATCHWORDS:	Application – Criminal Compensation – Sexual Assault – Mental or Nervous Shock
LEGISLATION:	Criminal Code 1999 (Qld) ss 663A, 663AA, 663AA(1), 663B, 663B(1), 663B(2), 663BA Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld) s 46(2) Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld) ss 5, 10, 10(1)(d)
CASES:	HW v LO [2001] 2 Qd R 415 R v Morrison; ex parte West [1998] 2 Qd R 79 R v Jones; ex parte McClintock [1996] 1 Qd R 524 Chong v Chong [1999] QCA 314 R v Tiltman; ex parte Dawe, unreported, Supreme Court of Queensland, Lee J, 22 June 1994 SAM v. SAM, Unreported, District Court of Queensland, Robertson DCJ, 27/10/2000
COUNSEL:	Ms J Fadden (solicitor) for the applicant No appearance for the respondent
SOLICITORS:	Legal Aid Queensland for the applicant No appearance for the respondent