SL (by her next friend NL) [2014] WADC 178

Jurisdiction:	DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2014] WADC 178
Case No:	APP:30/2014	Heard:	3 DECEMBER 2014
Coram:	STEVENSON DCJ	Delivered:	23/12/14
Location:	PERTH
No of pages:	26	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Appeals allowed
PDF Version

Parties:	SL (by her next friend NL)
Catchwords:	Criminal injuries compensation Sexual abuse by a child cousin Subsequent sexual abuse by adult neighbour Global assessment of compensation by assessor Multiple sexual offences by each offender Two offenders Apportionment Future counselling and therapy Maximum entitlement for multiple unrelated offences by one offender Section 34 Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003
Legislation:	Criminal Code Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003 District Court Rules 2005
Case References:	A v D (1994) 11 WAR 481 AJA v PSS [2002] WADC 194 Attorney General v Her Honour Judge Schoombee [2012] WASCA 29 BT v BT [2014] WADC 166 Chappell v Bowe [2006] WADC 29 ELK v CFB [2009] WADC 90 Fagan v Crimes Compensation Tribunal (1982) 150 CLR 666 Gullelo v Halloran [2008] WADC 145 Hatfield v Undersecretary for Law (Unreported, WASC, Library No 4012, 15 December 1980) Hazart Pty Ltd v Rademaker (1993) 11 WAR 26 Hogben v Darcy [2009] WADC 63 JAW v The State of Western Australia [2012] WASCA 7 JAW v The State of Western Australia [2013] WASCA 261 LRE v AFK [2005] WADC 162 MM v MR (Unreported, WADC, Library No D980343, 4 December 1998) Re; Tilbury [2010] WADC 46 S v Neumann (1995) 14 WAR 452 Stocker v Loeper [2001] WASC 176 Tidmarsh v Assessor for Criminal Injuries Compensation [2011] WADC 173 VPAN [2011] WADC 40

JURISDICTION : DISTRICT COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

IN CHAMBERS

LOCATION : PERTH CITATION : SL (by her next friend NL) [2014] WADC 178 CORAM : STEVENSON DCJ HEARD : 3 DECEMBER 2014 DELIVERED : 23 DECEMBER 2014 FILE NO/S : APP 30 of 2014 MATTER : IN THE MATTER of Part 7 of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003

AND

IN THE MATTER of an appeal by

BETWEEN : SL (by her next friend NL)

Appellant

FILE NO/S : APP 90 of 2014 MATTER : IN THE MATTER of Part 7 of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003

AND

IN THE MATTER of an appeal by

BETWEEN : SL (by her next friend NL)

Appellant

ON APPEAL FROM:

Jurisdiction : CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION ASSESSOR OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Coram : ASSESSOR R GUTHRIE

Citation : [2014] WACIC 5

Catchwords:

Criminal injuries compensation - Sexual abuse by a child cousin - Subsequent sexual abuse by adult neighbour - Global assessment of compensation by assessor - Multiple sexual offences by each offender - Two offenders - Apportionment - Future counselling and therapy - Maximum entitlement for multiple unrelated offences by one offender - Section 34 Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003

Legislation:

Criminal Code

Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003
District Court Rules 2005

Result:

Appeals allowed

Representation:

APP 30 of 2014

Counsel:

Appellant : Mr M D Cuerden SC

Amicus Curiae

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read SL (by her next friend NL) and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2014] WADC 178
Decision Date: 23 DECEMBER 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Queensland, the case of SL (by her next friend NL) was heard concerning the calculation of compensation for sexual offences committed against SL by two separate offenders. The first was a child cousin, and the second was an adult neighbour. The dispute revolved around the proper method of assessing and apportioning the compensation for multiple sexual offences committed by both offenders. The court was tasked with determining the correct approach to calculating the maximum entitlement for multiple unrelated offences by one offender and ensuring that the total compensation was fairly apportioned between the two offenders.

The primary legal issues before the court involved the interpretation and application of section 34 of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 2003. This section outlines the principles for assessing and apportioning compensation for injuries caused by multiple offenders. The court had to consider whether the assessor, who had awarded a global assessment of compensation without apportioning it between the offenders, had correctly applied the statutory provisions. Additionally, the court needed to decide on the appropriate compensation for future counselling and therapy, and whether the maximum entitlement for multiple unrelated offences by one offender had been correctly calculated.

The court found that the assessor had not correctly applied the statutory provisions in apportioning the compensation between the two offenders. The court held that the assessor should have considered the culpability of each offender and the nature of the offences when determining the appropriate compensation. The court also found that the maximum entitlement for multiple unrelated offences by one offender should have been calculated based on the severity and number of offences, rather than a global assessment. The court concluded that the appeals should be allowed, and the matter remitted for reassessment by a differently constituted panel. The court's decision emphasised the importance of correctly applying the statutory provisions to ensure that the compensation awarded is fair and just.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeals allowed

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.