SMR v LJC

Case [2010] QDC 285

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

SMR  v LJC [2010] QDC 285

PARTIES:

SMR

(Applicant)

V

LJC

(Respondent)

FILE NO/S:

BD294/2010

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Application for criminal compensation

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court, Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

18 June 2010 (ex tempore)

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

18 June 2010

JUDGE:

Irwin DCJ

ORDER:

The respondent pay the applicant the sum of $31,500 by way of compensation pursuant to s 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld) for injuries sustained as a result of the offences of rape and sexual assault, which lead to the conviction of the respondent in the District Court at Brisbane on 27 August 2009

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – ORDERS FOR COMPENSATION, REPARATION, RESTITUTION, FORFEITURE AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY – COMPENSATION – QUEENSLAND – application for criminal compensation – where the respondent was convicted of one count each of rape and sexual assault – where the applicant suffered abrasions, bruising and swelling to her back, left hand and arm, right knee and thigh, and moderate mental or nervous shock on the basis of a moderate post-traumatic stress disorder which had persisted for about 4 years and was likely to persist indefinitely, and adverse impacts under reg 1A(2) as a result of the offences – assessment of compensation

CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – ORDERS FOR COMPENSATION, REPARATION, RESTITUTION, FORFEITURE AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY – COMPENSATION – QUEENSLAND – application for criminal compensation – where the applicant suffered mental or nervous shock injuries compensable under s 20 of the Criminal Victims Act 1995 (Qld) as a result of the respondent’s sexual offending – whether the applicant also suffered discrete adverse impacts under reg 1A(2) of the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld) which were not a part of the applicant’s s 20 injuries

Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld) (repealed), s 20, s 21, 24, s 25, s 26, s 30, Schedule 1

Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld) (repealed), s 1A, s 2, s 2A

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), r 110(a), r 110(c)

Victims of Crime Assistance Act 2009 (Qld), s 149, s 155(1)(a), s 155(2)(b)

AT v FG [2004] QCA 295, applied

Ferguson v Kazakoff [2001] 2 QD R 320; [2000] QCS 156, cited

Hall v Dizo [2010] QDC 71, applied

JMR obo SRR v Hornsby [2009] QDC 147, cited

PAJ v AAK [2010] QCA 78, applied

R v Atwell; ex parte Jullie [2002] 2 Qd R 367, applied

R v Tiltman; ex parte Dawe (1995) QSC 345, applied

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

Riddle v Coffey (2002) 133 A Crim R 220; [2002] QCA 337, applied

RMC v NAC [2009] QSC 149, applied

SAY v AZ; ex parte A-G (Qld) [2007] 2QdR 295; [2006] QCA 462, applied

Wren v Gaulai [2008] QCA 148, applied

Continue reading SMR v LJC

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
SMR v LJC [2010] QDC 285
Case
[2010] QDC 285
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of SMR v LJC involved an application for criminal compensation by the applicant, SMR, against the respondent, LJC, who had been convicted of rape and sexual assault. SMR sought compensation for injuries she sustained, including physical injuries such as abrasions, bruising, and swelling, as well as moderate mental or nervous shock diagnosed as post-traumatic stress disorder. The applicant argued that these injuries resulted from the respondent’s criminal offences and that she had also suffered discrete adverse impacts as defined under regulation 1A(2) of the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld). The primary legal issue the court needed to address was whether the applicant's claims for discrete adverse impacts under the regulation were separate and distinct from her compensable mental or nervous shock injuries under section 20 of the Criminal Victims Act 1995 (Qld).

The court considered the legislative framework governing criminal compensation in Queensland, focusing on the definitions and scope of compensable injuries. It examined whether the discrete adverse impacts alleged by SMR were encompassed within the broader category of mental or nervous shock or if they constituted separate and distinct adverse impacts. The court found that the discrete adverse impacts claimed were indeed part of the same injury, i.e., the mental or nervous shock, and not separate and distinct adverse impacts. Consequently, the court awarded compensation under section 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld) for the injuries sustained as a result of the offences, determining that the appropriate sum was $31,500. The respondent was ordered to pay this amount to the applicant as compensation.

Orders

Orders of the court

The respondent pay the applicant the sum of $31,500 by way of compensation pursuant to s 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld) for injuries sustained as a result of the offences of rape and sexual assault, which lead to the conviction of the respondent in the District Court at Brisbane on 27 August 2009

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.