Stubbs v Victims Compensation Fund Corpopration

In *Stubbs v Victims Compensation Fund Corporation*, the New South Wales Court of Appeal considered an appeal by the applicant, Stubbs, against a decision of the Compensation Court of New South Wales. The dispute concerned Stubbs's eligibility for compensation under the *Victims Compensation Act 1987* (NSW) for injuries sustained during an incident in which he was assaulted. The primary issue was whether the applicant's injuries were a "result of an act of violence" as defined by the Act, specifically in circumstances where the applicant had been involved in a consensual fight.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the assault, which occurred during a consensual fight, constituted an "act of violence" for the purposes of the *Victims Compensation Act 1987*. This involved an interpretation of the phrase "act of violence" and its application to situations where the victim may have initially consented to or participated in the physical altercation that led to their injuries. The court also had to consider whether the consensual nature of the initial engagement negated the characterisation of the subsequent assault as an act of violence attracting compensation.

The Court of Appeal held that the definition of "act of violence" in the *Victims Compensation Act 1987* did not require the act to be unprovoked or non-consensual. Applying the principles of statutory interpretation, the court found that an act of violence could still be an act of violence even if the victim had initially consented to a physical confrontation. The critical factor was whether the injury sustained was a direct consequence of an act that was violent in nature, irrespective of the victim's initial participation. The court reasoned that the purpose of the Act was to provide compensation to victims of crime, and this purpose was not undermined by compensating an individual injured in a consensual fight if the injury resulted from an act of violence.

The appeal was allowed, and the decision of the Compensation Court was set aside. The matter was remitted to the Compensation Court for redetermination of the applicant's claim for compensation.