STH v LJC

Case [2010] QDC 303

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

STH  v LJC [2010] QDC 303

PARTIES:

STH

(Applicant)

V

LJC

(Respondent)

FILE NO/S:

BD268/2010

DIVISION:

Civil

PROCEEDING:

Application for criminal compensation

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court, Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

26 July 2010 (ex tempore)

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

19 July 2010

JUDGE:

Irwin DCJ

ORDER:

The respondent pay the applicant the sum of $21,750 by way of compensation pursuant to s 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld) for injuries sustained as a result of the offence of rape, 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 of rape – where the applicant suffered abrasions, bruising and scratches, moderate mental or nervous shock on the basis of a post-traumatic stress disorder which had persisted for about 17 months 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 – where mental or nervous shock was assessed as being in the minor range – where this assessment was made by giving the mental or nervous shock a PIRS rating under the Civil Liability Regulation 2003 (Qld) and then translating this to a score under Sch 1 of the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld) – whether this approach was correct

Civil Liability Regulation 2003 (Qld), Sch 4, Pt 2

Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld) (repealed), s 20, s 21, s 22, s 24, s 25, s 26, s 30, Schedule 1

Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld) (repealed), s 1A, s 2, s 2A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

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]…

Continue reading STH v LJC

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
STH v LJC [2010] QDC 303
Case
[2010] QDC 303
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

STH filed an application for criminal compensation against LJC in the District Court of Queensland. STH had been the victim of a rape offence committed by LJC, which resulted in the latter's conviction. STH suffered physical injuries, including abrasions, bruising, and scratches, as well as a moderate mental or nervous shock in the form of post-traumatic stress disorder, which had persisted for about 17 months and was likely to continue indefinitely. STH also experienced adverse impacts as per regulation 1A(2) of the Criminal Victims Act 1995 (Qld). The primary legal issue before the court was the correctness of the approach taken to assess the mental or nervous shock injuries under the Civil Liability Regulation 2003 (Qld) and the Criminal Offence Victims Regulation 1995 (Qld). The court had to determine whether the method of assessing the mental or nervous shock by converting a PIRS rating to a score under the relevant schedule was appropriate.

The court considered the statutory framework and the relevant regulations to assess the mental or nervous shock injuries. It was noted that the assessment of such injuries should be based on the severity and duration of the shock. The court held that the method of assessment applied in this case was correct and consistent with the statutory provisions. The mental or nervous shock was assessed as being in the minor range. Consequently, the court determined that the compensation payable to STH should reflect the injuries sustained and the duration of the mental or nervous shock. The court ordered LJC to pay STH the sum of $21,750 as compensation for the injuries sustained as a result of the offence of rape.

Orders

Orders of the court

The respondent pay the applicant the sum of $21,750 by way of compensation pursuant to s 24 of the Criminal Offence Victims Act 1995 (Qld) for injuries sustained as a result of the offence of rape, 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.